Skip to main content

Full text of "Of justification: four disputations clearing and amicably defending the truth, against the unnecessary oppositions of divers learned and reverend brethren"

See other formats 


^'^|1 


r':^;*^. 


* 


»W^.s. 


7- 


Vjt 


Mc  il 


9 


/  *^7 


\ 


M 


'■4 


/" 


DUKE 

UNIVERSITY 

LIBRARY 

Treasure  %oom 

A 


I 


4 


Of  Juftification: 

FOUR 

DISPUTATIONS 

Clearing  and  amicably  Defending  the 
Trudi,  againft  the  unnecefTary  Op- 
pofitions  of  divers  Learned  and  Re- 
verend Brethren^ 


"Bj  "^chard "Baxter, 
A  fervant  of  Chrift  for  Truth  and  Peace- 


John  318,19. 

Hethat  Believethcnhim^  u  not  condtmned  :  hut  ht  that  hiitvethnct 
is  condemntd  aire  tidy  ^  hecauft  he  h/ith  rot  believed  in  the  Nam*  of 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God.  And  tMit  « the  condemnation^  that  Light 
is  come  into  the  woridi  avdmen  loved  dark»efs  rather  then  Light ^  be* 
caufe  their  deeds  roere  evil. 


Dr. TwUs^  y indie.  Grat.lib.l.pMrt.^.pag.  (Vol.min.)  302. 

[Verumin  divcrfo  genere  ad  Juftitiam  Dei  rcfertur  Chrifti  falif- 
fadio,  &  fides  noftra  :  Chrifti  fatisfadio  ad  eandem  refertur  per 
modum.meriti  &  cond'gnitatis ;  noftra  vero  fides  ad  eandem  re- 
fertur duntaxat  per  modumcongruaedifpofitionis.  J  r:pi 


LONDON, 
Printed  h^  R.^.^     Nezil  Simmons  Bookfeller  in  Kederminjler^  and 
arc  CO  be  fo'd  b^  t^■^  there ;  and  by  N-nhan-el  €kj»J^  at  the  Gun 
in  Prfi^'  <"hurcb.Yard.   1658. 


cK-iijb:j...... 


The  Preface. 


S35SJ 


Chriftian  Readers, 

O  pr  eve  fit  pur  trouble  andmifunder- 
(landing  in  the  perufal  ef  thefe  Dif- 
putatwns :  1  have  two  things  here 
at  the  entrance  to  acquaint  yourvith. 
Firft^  7  he  occafton  of  all  thefe  Wri- 
tings :  Secondly^  The  true  fiate 
of  the  Controv'Crfies  here  managed. 
The  firfl  Difptttation  u  upon  a  Que  ft  ion  of  conftderable. 
rveight  ,  whtther  Chrijl  as  Chrifl  ,  an^  fo  as  Pro- 
fhet  ^  Priefl  and  King  ,  be  the  obje^i  of  that  Faith  by. 
ivhich  fve  Are  juftified  <  Three  points  efpccially  ?ny 
Reverend  Brother  Mr,  Bhkt  was  p leafed  to  pHblijh  his 
Reafons  againft^  which  in  my  A^boriCms  I  b^d  ajjerted.'. 
Thefe  bein^  vindicated  by  metn  an  Apologie^  he  renewed 
tbcconfli^inhisTrcatife  ofthe  Sacraments,     The  firft 

A  ?  about 


The  Preface, 

aho^tt  theSdcramsnU  I  h/ive  defended i^dn  in  a  Volnmi 
bj  it  [elf.  The  fecond  is  this  in  hdnd ,  which  I  had  finilh- 
cd  aboit^  fifteen  or  fixteen  months  ago.  The  third  is  about 
the  Inflrumental  efficiency  of  Faith  to  our  fufiificatisn, 
ofrvhich  I  had  alfo  begun  Above  a  twelve  month  ftnce. 
But  it  bath  idtelj  f  leafed  ear  tpife  and  gracious  Lord  to 
call  this  Reverend  Broth:r  to  himfelf  nvhereupon^thongh 
this  firfl  Difputation  was  gone  fo  far  ^that  [could  not  well 
recall  it^yet  the  others ^whtch  was  not  out  of  mj  power j  I  re- 
folved  to  condemn  to  perpetual  ftlencejfyou  ask  me  a  red- 
fon  of  this  refolution^J  mufi  deftn  that  my  dtfpofition  and 
fafsion  may  go  for  fart  of  a  Reafon  this  once.  The  grief 
of  my  heart  for  the  lofiofthis  precious  fervant  ofChri/l 
would  not  permit  me  to  appear  any  further  in  a  way  that 
feemed  to  militate  with  the  dead ,  and  with  one  whofe 
death^  wi  have  all  fo  much  caufe  to  lament,     k^Ios^ 
that  our  fin  fhould  provoke  our  dear  Father ,  to  put  out 
the  precious  Lights  of  his  San^uary^  andtocall  in  fuch 
experienced  faithful  Labourers  ,  while  ignorance^  and 
error ^  and  prophanefs^  and  all  Vice  doth  fo  plenteoufly 
furvive.    When  the fe  plants  of  Hill  do  thrive  upon  uSy 
under  all  our  -care  to  weed  them  up  :  what  willthey  do 
when  the  Vineyard  is  left  def elate  ?  Though  God  in  mercy 
is  raiftng  up  a  fupply  of  young  ones ,   that  may  come  to 
he  Pillars  in  their  dayet :  yet  alas^  what  difference  will 
the  church  find  between  thefe^  and  their gf^ave  experien- 
ced Guides  :  and  how  many  years  fiudy^  and  experience, 
and  patience,  is  neceffary  to  ripen  thefe  tender  plants ,  to 
bring  them  1 9  the  Jiature,  and  fiahility,  andfirengthof 
fuch  at  this  Bleffed  fervant  of  chrifi,  that  is- now  takers 
from  us.    The  fenfe  of  our  lofs  dothmdke  it  doubly  bit"- 
ter  to  my  thoughts,  that  ever  I  was  unhappily  engaged  in-. 
any  wxy  of  ferving  the  l^rd  of  Truth  >  which  mufi  con-i- 

tein 


The  Preface. 

ttinfo  ntucb  c6ntraM6ficn  of  [uch  4  frknd  of  Truth. 
As  It  is  for  God  J  or  for  Truth  ,  or  for  the  ufe  of  the 
churchy  1  dare  not  diJ9w»  it  •,  hut  as  it  favcnreth  of 
*  difagreenient  {though  ftecefsitated  to  it )  it  is  verj  un- 
grateful to  me  t»  think  of  or  revicjv.  But  our  difeafes  wtd 
knve  their  f  dins*  Wewuflbenr  the  fmitcs  of  our  own 
and  o»r  Brethrensrpeakncjjes,  rather  thennegle^  tlefer- 
vice  of  Chrtftt  his  Church  and  Truth,  We  quickij  pjr^ 
don  one  another^  and  at  the  furthefl  Htavtn  agreeihm 
all:  But  the  benefit  of  our  fearch  ^  though  mixed  with 
$ur  infirmities^  may  he  Jomctvbat  fervicfahU  when  we  are 
gene. 

The  fecond  Difputation  is  yet  more  ungrateful  to  me  ^ 
then  the  firfi :    the  Jleverend  Brother  whom  I  contradict 
^elng,/u  high  and  dear  in  my  efieem  as  msfi  men  alive  • 
indeed  being  an  Honour  and  Blefing  to  the  Church  in  this 
unworthy  Generation,    The  Lord  freferve  him  long  for 
his  jervice.    But  my  Defence  here  alio  is  necefsitatcd. 
i.   /  did  my  befi  to  have  prevented  the  Necefsity  ,  and 
could  not :  I  mean^  not  by  dtfwading  him  from  offoftng 
me  in  frint^  for  that  might  havt  hindered  the  Church  of 
the  Benefit  oj  his  Offofnton  ( for  ought  1  knew^  till  I  had 
ften  it : )    But  by  trying  fir  ft  ^  whether  I  could  receive  or 
give  (atisfa6fion,     2,  I  had  fublickly  obliged  my  felf, 
if  this  Reverend  Brother  did  Difjeiit  ,  to  fearch  again  : 
and  by  an  Bpifile,  became  more  accountable  to  the  worU 
for  Difjenting  from  him  then  other  men.    3.   His  Name 
defervedly  precious  in  the  Church ,  h^ththe  greater  ad- 
'vantage  to  over- lay  the  Truth ^  where  humane  impcrfecli- 
00  engageth  him  again fi  U^    Tet  do  1  not  blame  him  for 
beginning  this  Contejl  with  me  •,  but  take  the  blame  to 
y>iy  felfthat  might  tccafion  it  ,  bf  dilhonouring  his  l^^-me 
by  a  tem^racious  prefixing  it  to  my  undigejied  uppers  5 

{though 


..^he  Preface. 

(though  nothing  bttt  High  efiimAtierK  ^nd  A^c6ikn  was 
7nj  Motive.) 

The  Letters  that  pi/l  between  us  were  never  intended 
for  the  t'iciv  ef  the  world  :  And  therefore  1  rnufl  defirt 
the  Reader  to  remember  it  ft  ffom^etjmc.  I  be  more  fr.sfsing 
and  vehement ^then  manners  dndrevercnc^  require  -^  he- 
cauferveHJe  to  [fcak  freelier  in  private  amon^  friends^ 
then  in  the  hearing  of  the  world,,  ^nd  yet  I  thought  tt 
wj  duty  now  to  joyn  them  wi{h  the  reflfor  ihefe  Reafens. 
I.  Becaitfc.  fomepaffAgc^nthcJYrttin^fcfth^  Reverend 
Brother,  do  in  a  manner, invif.e  vte  Jjo'it^  2,.  Betfaufe  the 
matter  rcquireth  me  to  fj^eak  the  fame  things  •,  and  there' 
fore  it  16  as  good  affix  the  old  ^  as  be  at  the  fame  lab  oar 
needle [ly  again.  3 .  And  it  can  be.  no  ivrong  to  him^  he- 
caufe  it  u  my  own  laferf,  that  are  the,  mainbulkpf  i^h^t 
1  ptiblijh:  His  Letters  being  brief  ^  and  annexed 'iut  as 
the  occafions  of  mine*  4.  But  e^eciaUyj.  J  was  brought 
to  think  it -meet^  by  the  open  blame  that  I  have  received 
■from  fome  very  dearan.d  Reverend  Brethren^  for  not  prt- 
venting  this  publike  Contefl.  And  therefore  I  thdught 
good  to  let  then;  fee )  that  I  was  not  ^H^Jj^^^^i^ U^{^' 
vent  it,  .;.i  >. ;   1 ..   ,.,  .  x.^ 

J f  there  be  any  paffagesin  thcfe  Wriiingi  too  eager  er 
provoking  {which  1  mu ft  needs  ftifpecf  even  where  I  havt 
not  cbjerved  them^  as  being  con fcio^is  of  toQ  keen  A.fliLe^ 
forgetting,  the  ferfonswhile  I  (^cak  meerlyU)  the  r^oras 
and  matter^)  1  do  intreatmy  Brethren  te p. ifd&n  it^as  be- 
ifignot  dtfgnedto  their  .prov(f cation  or  dijhonof^r^and  mJ 
heartily  ^0  the  like  by  theirs^  and  06  J  hope  Gad  will  di- 
both  theirs  md.mine,-  And  hdo  adjure  fhe\%^ader  to  k^,^ 
Meve  that  this  Contr  oyer  fie  yfor  all  c{ir  ii^firmtfexis  md' 
,mgcd  with  a  very  high  eflee^m  and  honour  of.thxif^  M eve- 
fend  Brethren,  whom  I  am  necefit/ted  io.g^infny^  Ner 

would 


The  Preface. 

would  1  have  it  he  anj  dilbonoHr  to  them  ( thettgh  An  eX' 
cnfeto  me^)  that  thej  have  been  th:  A(j^ilants^Andhegun 
the  corjfli^  :  for  the  Truths  of  God  mujl  he  f  recto  us  to  us 
all,  and  I  doubt  not  but  they  were  confident  that  it  \V4i 
fome  dangerous  errottr^  which  they  jet  upon^  and  1  have 
here  proved  to  be  the  Truth,  Nor  m  it  any  fuch  ^vrohg  to 
cither  fide^to  be  openly  contradi Bed, that  Rcafens  may  be 
openly  produced^  and  men  may  have  for-nc  further  help,  to 
fee  into  thefe  Points.  Let  the  proud  (well  or  fmart^  be- 
caufethej  are  thus  proclaimed  fallible  y  and  mijlaken  s 
but  the  Humble  that  are  devo'.ed  fervants  to  the  Truthj 
are  of  another  (^irit^  and  have  learnt  another  lejjon. 

And  if  any  Papift:  or  enemy  to  our  umty  and  Peace  [ball 
from  thefe  V^rittngs  predicate  our  dtffentions  or  dtvift^ 
ens,  let  them  know  to  their  faces  ^  that  cvin  thefe  differen- 
ces as  momentous  as  they  jeem^are  not  neer  fo great  as  are 
commonly  publif]jed amo-fjg  thcmf elves :  nor  are  the)  for 
"Number  one  to  twc/ity^  perhaps  to  a  hundred^that  are  agi- 
tated in  their  Scbooles,andthe  writings  of  their  Doctors  : 
Had  we  fuch  differences  as  thofe  of  the  Jefuit  Cafuifts 
opened  by  Montaltas  the  Janfenian  tn  hts  M\flcnc  of  Je- 
luitifm,  out  of  their  own  writings^  fomething  they  miglt 
then  fay  again fl  us.  Tea  I  doubt  not  but  we  differ  with 
more  hearty  Chriflian  Love,  then  they  agree  \  ^n^  have 
more  real  union  in  our  contr over ftes,  then  they  have  in 
their  Articles  of  Faith,  and  are  necrer  one  ariuthu  in  our 
fmallcr  differences ,  then  the  French  .iW  !rali;uis  r.re  in 
their  very  Fundamentals, 

The  third  Difputation  was  called  forth  by  A/r.  Warner'i 
Trcattfe  of  the  Objed  and  Office  of  F.^ith  ,  and  takey 
up  the  fubjeB  of  the  firfi  Difputation,  with  fome  others,' 

when  that  was  in  thetrefyMr,  Tombes^  Book  a^ainfl 
Inhnt^i^iiCm  came  forth,  in  which  J  found  the  Pa- 


The  Preface- 

prs  that  I  [eftt  to  him  ( ufon  his  imfortunity)  frintedl 
rvithut  my  consent  ^  {which  if  God  mli^  I  [ball  yet  vindi- 
cdte, )  And  therefore  feeing  that  it  is  his  tpay^  I  thought 
he  might  do  the  like  by  other  Papers  ,  which  formerly  I 
kid  wrote  to  him  on  this  [ubje^i  of  ^nflification,  x^nd 
therefore  thinking  it  fitter  that  I  [IjohU  publifJ}  them  (  of 
the  tivo  jthen  he^{  1  have  faved  him  the  charge  of  printing 
tbem^  and  annexed  them  to  the[e. 

The  fourth  Difputation  was  added, hccattfe  it  is  thevC" 
rj  heart  of  our  Controvcrfie,  which  mofl  of  our  Difputes 
about  the  inflrumentall  Cattfality  of  Faith  as  to  fu/iifir 
cat  ion  J  and  the  other  Concomitant  ^are  refolved  into. 

That  the  Reader  may  under fi and  thefe  Difputations 
the  better^  I  fljallhcre  at  the  entrance  fhiw  him  the  face 
of  the  way  that  I  maintain  j  and  alfo  of  the  way  that  I  ep' 

The  way  that  1  plead  for  is  contained  in  theje  Propofi' 
lions.  I .  Man  having  broken  the  Law  of  Nature  or  works  ^ 
is  lofl^  and  difabled  to  his  own  Recovery ^or  to  do  any  works, 
by  which  that  Law  will  ever  jufti fie  him. 

2 .  fefu^  Chrifl  hath  Redeemed  him  from  this  lofi  con' 
dition^byhis  Incarnation^  Lifc^  Death,  Refurre6li-enj^c^ 
fulfilling  the  Law  bj  his  obedience^  and  fuffering  for  our 
not  fulfilling  it  J  and  thereby  fat  iff jing  the  Lawgiver  ^ 
and  attainingthe  ends  of  the  Law  ^and  more:  making  him' 
felf  an  example  to  us  ofholinefs.^  and  be  coming  our  Tca- 
cher^  High  Priefi  and  King,  to  fave  us  from  all  ftn  and. 
enemies^  and  recover  m  to  God^for  our  Salvation^andhis 
Glory  and  Pleafure. 

3.  7  he  offices  and  Works  ofchrifl^  arc  for  other  ends 
as  well  as  for  our  jufitfication-^  even  forourSan£iificA' 
tion^  Glorification^  &c.  ■ 

^yTht.  Believer  ought  not  to  confound  the  offites^mrkfy " 

or. 


The  Preface. 

br  ends  and  effects ,   hut  to  a^^rchcnd  them  tu  dipnBly 
as  he  can, 

5.  The  fame  Offices  ofchrifl  are  exercifed  in  the  ef- 
felting  feveral  works :  He  doth  jufltfie  m  both  as  rrieff^ 
Frophet  and  King  :  and  he  [an6lifieth  us  as  Priefl,  Pro- 
phet and  Kiftgy  His  Death  purchaftng  beth  our  ]ufiifica- 
tien  and  [anSttfieation  •  and  his  Teaching  [hewing  tis  the 
way  to  both  J  and  his  Kingly  Office  conferring  both^  though 
moji  notably  ourjufltficatton  5  and  the  Prophetical  effeli- 
ing  more  of  our  fan^ification,  then  of  our  jujlification. 

6y  We  mufl  have  part  in  Chrifi  htmfelf  as  our  Head^in 
Qrder  of  Nature  before  we  can  partake  of  jufii^ cation, 
Sanflification,  ( as  following  our  frjl  fatth  )  or  Glorifi- 
cation from  him. 

7.  Though  our  Phyjical  Communion  wit  he  hrf  ft  is  ef- 
fe(lcdby  a  Phjftcal  change  on  the  foul  •,  yet  our  Right  to 
him  and  to  jujlification^  and  other  following  benefits  is 
the  effe6i  of  a  free  Gift,  or  Teftament ,  or  Promifej  and 
that  Promt fe  or  free  Gift  is  our  Title  ^which  is  Fundamen- 
tum  juris,  or  the  efficient  Inftrumentalcaufe. 

8.  chrift  and  pardon^  or  ju/hfication^  and  Right  to 
Heaven/ Sec.  are  given  us  by  one  and  the  fame  Deed  of 
Gift :  fo  that  he  that  hath  Right  to  ChrtH  ,  hath  by  the 
fame  Title  ^  on  the  fame  terms  Right  to  the[e  his  benefits. 

■   9.   This  Tromife  or  Gift  is  conditional-^  though  Jt  be 
but  the  Condition  of  a  free  Gift  that  u  recruited. 

10.  No  marts  works.  Repentance  or  Fa  th  u  his  proper 
Title  to  pardon  or  life  ,  nor  any  proper  meritorious  caufe 
of  it  •,  nor  any  efficient ,  Principal  or  Inftmmental  caufes 
efhis  Right  -,  No  a5iof  ours  can  be  more  then  a  meer  con- 
dition of  that  Right  •  and  a  Caufa  fine  qua  non  {which^ 
as  it  is  an  a^f  that's p leafing  toCod^andhath  the  Promife 

of  a  Reward^  the  Fathers  called  improperly  by  the  Name 

(42)  of 


The  Preftce. 

of  CAierit^  Vfhtchyet  lefs  fitly  agrees  to  the  Condition  of 
Mr  firflfuflilicittionthen  of  our  Glorification.} 

1 1 .  Chrifls  f-irdon  and  life  arc  given  hj  this  Gofpel- 
Promife  on  condition  of  oar  faith  in  Chrifl^  that  is^  iftve 
become  Believers  in  Chrijl  -,  or  Chrifiians  -,  which  is ^  If 
xve  accept  cf  Chrijl  as  offered  in  the  Gofpel^  and  that  is^  to 
bring  m  from  our  fim  a>jdf  elves  to  God,  by  the  a^s  of  his 
Teachings  Pricfily,  and  Kingly  Office-^  Or,  if  we  believe 
in  Chrtfi  as  Chrift.  So  that  it  is  not  any  one  fingle  a5i 
of  Faith  that  is  the  condition  offuflification  :  nor  are  the 
fever  at  Benefits  of  Chrifl  given  us  on  condition  of  fever  al 
a5is  of  Faith  •,  as  if  we  had  Right  te  pardon  bj  one  a^i^and 
to  chrift  him felf  by  another^  and  to  Adoption  by  another  r, 
and  to  Heaven  by  another  ^^c.  Nor  have  the  fever  al  aBs 
of  our  faith  as  divided  anlnterefl  in  procurement  of  the 
Benefits  as  Chrifls  aciions  had:  But  it  is  one  and  the  fame 
entire  faith  in  Chrijl  as  Chriji,  that  is  the  condition  of  all 
thefe  confe^ftent  Jpecial  Benefits  •  wit  boat  divifon  in  the 
procurement.  So  that  the  Belief  in  Chrifi  as  our  Tea- 
cher  and  King  hath  as  much  hand  in  our  fufiification^  as 
believing  in  him  as  rriefl  -,  it  being  the  back  war dnefs  of 
nature  to  the  acceptance  of  Chrijls  Government  and  Do^ 
Brine,  that  is  a  jpecial  Keaf&n  why  faith  is  made  the  con- 
dition of  that  pardon^  which  Nature  is  not  jo  backward  te 
accept, 

1 2.  The  Reafons  to  be  af^igned^  why  faith' in  Chrifl  is 
mads  the  condition  of  fufiification^.  is^  i .  The  will  of 
the  free  Donor,  2.  The  fitnefof  faith  to  that  Office  5 
as  being  fuitedto  Gods  Endi,  and  to  Chrifl  the  object ^ 
and  to  mans  neceffttous  eflate.  Not  only  becaufe  it  is  the 
Receiving  of  Right eoufnefs^  bat  for  all  thefe  Reafons  to- 
gether, in  which  its  aptttj^de  doth  conjifl  v  and  its  Apti' 
inde  to  the  Honour  of  the  Redeemer  and  free  fufltfier  is 

the 


The  Preface. 

the  frind^al part  of  its  Aptitude  :  it  being  impofthU 
thdt  Ged  [honld  prefer  man  as  his  ultimate  end  before 
himfelf, 

13.  Though  the  Reafon  why  Faith  is  made  by  God 
the  condition  of  our  J^uliif  cation  y  mufl  partly  be  fetcht 
from  the  Nature  of  Faith,  tvhieh  fome  call  its  Inftru- 
mentallitj  in  apprehending  Chrifl^  yet  the  Reajon  why  we 
are  Juftified  by  Faiih^  mufl  be  fetched  from  the  Tenour 
of  the  Promt fe  and  Will  of  the  Promt fcr.  So  that  though 
the  Remote  Reafon  be  that  Aptitude  of  Faith  ^  which  is 
the  Difpofitio  matQUX-,  yet  the  formal  neereft  Reafon  is^ 
becaufe  God  hath  made  it  the  condition  (fthe  Gift^  which 
jhall  fufpend  the  efficacy  till  performed^  and  when  per- 
formed, the  benefit  fhall  be  ours. 

14.  As  Faiihhath  its  denomination  from  fome  one 
or  few  ahs^  which  yet  fuppofe  many  as  concomitant  ar,d 
confequent :  So  thofe  concomitant  and  confequent  A^s 
have  their  an fwer able  place  and Interefi  in  the  forcfaid 
Conditionality  ^  as  to  our  part  in  Chrifl  and  ^u fit fi ca- 
tion. 

15.  K^nd  therefore  it  was  not  the  Apojlles  meaning 
to  fet  Faith  againfl  thefe  concomitant  a^s^  (  as  Repen- 
tance, hope  in  Chrifl,  deftre  ofchriftjove  to  Chrifijdcc. ) 
and  to  exclude  thefe  under  the  notion  of  Works :  but  con- 
trarily  to  fuppofe  them  in  their  order. 

i6,7he  bttrdenfcme  works  of  the  Mofaical  Law^fuppo- 
ed  to  be  fuch  as  from  the  dignity  and  perfeBion  of  that 
Law  J  would  jujlifie  men  by  procuring  pardon  of  fin  ^  and 
acceptance  with  God ,  are  they  that  the  Jews  oppofed  to 
Chrifls  Righteoujnefs  and  fuflification  by  Faith  ,  and 
which  Paul  difffuteth  again fi  ,  and  confequently  againfl 
any  works ^  ora5is^  or  habits  of  our  own,  oppofed  to  chriji, 
fir  this  way  of  free  jaflification  by  him. 

{as  )  17.   Tbc 


T  he  Preface. 

17.  Ihe  not  Uoftng  our  luflificAtion  And  Title  to 
Chrijl  and  Life  ,  hath  mere  for  its  condition,  then  the 
fir  ft  Reception  or  Pofjefion  hath.  And  fo  hath  the  final 
luftipcation  at  judgement^  if  men  live  after  their  fir  [I 
believing. 

18.  ^uftiftcation  at  judgement  ^  betyig  the  Adjudg- 
ing ui  to  Glory^  hath  the  fame  conditions  oi  Glorif  cation 
it  [elf  bath. 

Reader t  In  thefe  Eighteen  Propofitions^thou  mayft 
fully  fee  the  Dodrine  that  I  contend  for,  which  alfo 
in  my  Confeffion,  Apologie,  and  this  Book  I  have 
exprelTed. 

And  now  I  will  Ihew  you  fomewhat  of  the  face 
of  the  Doctrine,  which  the  Diflenters  commonly  do 
propugne,  but  not  (b  largely,  becaufe  I  cannot  open 
other  mens  Doftrinc  fo  freely  and  fully  as  I  can  do 
my  own. 

1 .  7 hey  agree  with  me  that  Chrifls  Right eoufne^  is  the 
■meritorious  or  material  caufe  of  our  luftification,  though 
fome  add  that  it  is  the  formal  caufe ,  /  [upfofe  it  is  hut 
a  miflaken  name. 

2.  7 hey  agree  that  Chriflyand pardon^  and  Life^  are 
Given  m  by  the  Gofpel-Promtfe. 

3.  They  yield  that  an  entire  Faith  in  Chrifl  as  Chrifi, 
is  the  condition  of  our  Right  to  his  entire  Benefits. 

4.  But  they  fay  that  the  ABs  of  Faith  in  their  pro- 
curement of  the  Benefits  ,  have  as  divers  an  Interejft  as 
the  aUs  of  Chrifi^  vfhich  Faith  believeth, 

J,  And  they  fay,  that  it  is  Jome  one  a6i  (  or  two,  or 
fome  of  them)  that. is  the  (ok  )uflifying  a^  ^  though 
others  be  comprefent, 

6.  This 


The  Preface. 

6.  This  Utfliffm^  aEt  [ome  call  the  Apprehending  of 
Chrijl  as  a  Sacrifice  :  [erne  jf fiance^  or  Recumbencj^  or 
Reflingon  him^  as  a  Sacrifice  for  ftn^  or  as  others^  al[o  ort 
hs  A^ive  Rtghteoufnefs  ;  or  an  4ppreherjfion  of  Chrifts 
Eighteoufnejs  •,  or  as  others ,  A  pcrfrvafion  that  bis  Pro- 
mile  is  true  ^  or  an  Afjem  to  that  truth  •  or  as  others^  an 
Affurance^  or  atkafi  a  Beliefs  fide  Divina  ,  that  we  arc 
juflified.  ^^ 

7.  They  fay,  th'at  the  ncerejl  Reafon  of  our  lufUfica' 
tion  by  this  fiith  is^  becaufe  it  u  an  Infirument  of  our  lit- 
fiification^  or  of  our  Apprehending  Chrifls  Righteoufnef : 
Andfo,  that  we  arc  juftificdby  Faith  as  an  Inftrumental 
efficieht  caufe-^  fay  jome  :  and  as  a  Pafsive  Receiving 
Jnflrumcnt^fay  others. 

8.  They  fay^  that  there  being  but  two  wayes  of  lujli' 
f  cation  imaginable,  by  faith:,  or  by  works  ^  ail  that  de- 
fertthe  former  way  {if  they  defp  air  not  of  I  unification  ) 
fall  under  the  expe^atton  of  the  latter  :  And  I  grant  that 
Scripture  mentionetb  no  third  way . 

9.  Therefore  [ay  they,  feeing  that  Pauls  I ttfiifi cation 
by  Faith  ^  is  but  by  the  a6l  before  mentioned  :  whoever 
looketh  to  be  juflified^  in  whole ^  or  in  party  by  another  a[l 
(  as  by  Faith  in  Chrifi  as  Teacber^  as  King  ,  by  de firing 
him^  by  Hoping  in  him^  by  Loving  him ,  by  difcla  ming 
aJhur  own  righteoufnef  ^8zc.)  doth  feek  luflifcatisn  by 
fVorks  which  Paul  difputss  again fl^  and  fg  [et  again fl  the 
^lytrue  lufiification  by  Faith. 

1  o. .  Tea^  and  they  hold ,   that  whoever  looks  to  be.  lu- 
fiifedhy  that  aci  of  faithy  which  themf elves  call  the  lu - 
fiffying  a[i^  under  any  oihcr  notion  then  as  an  Infrumenti 
dfith  fall  to  juflification  by  works  ^    or  turn  from  tht- 
trfte^uft'fication  by  Faith. 

•    Ry  tbefe  umvarr  ant  able  Definitions^  and  DifUn^ions^ 

and 


*   The  Preface. 

and  additions  to  Cods  Word  5  A  UmcntAhU  perplexity 
is  prepared  for  mens  fouls  •,  ;'/  bein^^  not  pofsiUe  for  any 
living  man  to  knotv^  that  he  ju[i  hits  on  the  jnflilying 
Actt  and  which  is  it,  and  that  he  takes  in  no  more^  &c. 
andfo  that  he  is  not  a  Legaltflj  or  Jew,  and  falls  not  fir  om 
Bvangelical  lufi/fication  by  faith  in  Chrift.  So  that  lu- 
fltfi cation  by  fatth  in  Chrifl  as  Chrifly  {  confidcred  in  all 
cfjential  to  his  office j)  is  with  them  no  lujlif  cation  by 
faith  in  Chrijl,  but  jufltfication  hy  Works,  fo  much  dif^ 
owned  by  the  Jpo/lle,  the  expectants  of  which  are  fo  much 
condemned.  J  have  gathered  the  fum  of  wofl  of  the 
DiJJenters  minds  as  far  as  I  can  under fland it.  If  any 
particular  man  ofthcm^  dtfown  any  of  this t  let  him  better 
tell  you  his  own  mind:  For  1  intend  not  to  charge  him 
with  any  thing  that  he  dijowns.  The  Lord  Illuminate 
and  Reconcile  all  lis  people ,  by  his  Spirit  and  Truth, 
Amen. 


The 


The  C  o  N  T  E  T  s. 


T)ifputatm  I . 


Queft. 


litther  vft  are  jujlijie^  hy 
btUeving  in  'Jefut  Chrifi  ai 
our  King  and  Teacher^  as 
well  a»  bj  believing  in  hit 
bloe^  ?  Aff.  pag.l. 

The  ftatt  And  jveight  »f 
the  ^oMtroverJte.  p.  2 ,  ^c. 

Ten  Propofttions  for  filler  explication,  P«io,  &c. 

Argument  firfi,  p.  13 

Argu.  2.  p.  14 

Argu.3,  p.rp 

Argu.4.  p.  24 

Argu-s-  p.  27 

Argu.  6.  p.28 

Argu.7.  p.30 

Argu. 8.  p.31 

Argu.9.  p.35 

Argu.  10.  p.  3  8 

defended  againfl  Mr.  Blak's  ajfaalt.  p.  ^0 

Whether  Xibf  LaW  of  Grace  condemn  any,  and  how.         p.44  45 
The  Difin^ion  oj  fidcs  quae  juftificat,^  qua  juftificac  confider. 
fd.  p^6y&c. 

ib)  Mr. 


TheCoNTE  NTS^ 

Mr,  BUk's/iry?  Argument  attfifPereJ,  p-^S 

Argument  2.  anfwered.  p,5$ 

Argument  3.  p.  5  7 

Argument  4.  p.6  5 

Argument  5 .  and  6,  p.  64 


Difputation  z. 


WH ether  '^orks  '«''*  <*  caniltlon  of  coKdition  of 
fafitficiition^  andfo  rvhetloer  vre  art  jufi''^ 
fiedify  vforkj  as  fuch  a  condition  ? 
The  term^^[fJ^ot\t  and  f  unification'^  txplained,      p-7<^i7l 
The  Term  Condition  expUiitd.  p.72 

The.  Vruth  lalJi  do'^n  in  feve>^al  Provofttions.  p.75 

Neiaiiveand  Affirmative 
The  main  ^ropofition  proved.  P'79)  C^^* 

Queft.      C^nChr.fl  be I'flrumentalinjuflifying.  p.84 

Queft.    DdChrifi  exp  dte  the  fins^  that  by  the  Go^el  men  are 
obliged  to  pi4ni/hment  for  ?  p. 86 

Of  Riptntance,  and  the  habit  of  Faith  in  Jufiificationt  "p.  85, 

86 

Qaeft.    DoththeGofpiljtiliifie  tut  p.86,87,88,89 

Other  points  briefly  dtfcuffed.  p.^O 

The  Opponents  fiating  of  the  ^eflion,  P-94i9s9<^ 

Divers  unjufi  charges  repelled.  p.pj.to  lOI 

The  Opponents  Thefis^iW  ArgHmtntt.  p.  101,101 

HoVlf  Abraham  ^as  juftified^  debated  to  p.  i  lO 

All  ^orl^s  m^tke  not  the  Reward  to  be  not  of  Qrace^  proved  hy 

fix  Argument s»  p.  1 1 1  ,to  1 1 5.  And  by  ExpO' 

fitors.  p.iij.e^r. 

Hs/fecond  y^rgumtnt  from  the  difference  pftt  between  faith  and 

other  Graces  in  fttfi  fixation.  p  1 18 

The  cafe  of  faiths  Intere/}  osetted  bj  a  ^miiituh.  p.  1 20 

Hiis  third  Argument  confidered  :  Oftr  firfi  Juflification  hoW 

dfe^. 


The  C  O  N  T  E  N  rs. 

differtnt  from  the  following.  p.  122, 1 2^ 

Hit  fourth  Argumtnt  of  feif  Kighmufn^s  and  tAufultandi- 

tiont.  p.i24,c?-f. 

His  Fifth  Argument,  Workj  '^re  thtfrms^  therefore  net  tht 

condition.  if.il^ 

His  ftxth  Argument.  P- ^  3  2 

HisfeventkArgnmenU  Of  a  twofold  Righteoujnefs  or 

Jufti^ cation.  P  ^.53 

His  eight  Argument  that  cannot  be  a  condition  of  Jujlificatton, 

which  it/elf  needeth  fu/lffication.  P- 1  3<5 

AfifVcerid. 

Vnulju^geth  them  dung.  pi4^ 

Horv  jnftif J  ng  faith  belongs  to  the  LnWy  and  the  dipt ence  be- 
tween the  La^  and  Gojf  el,  PI42 
More  of  Chiflsfufftring  for  the  violation  of  the  »f\V  C  ove- 

nant.  P^^^ 

Hu  ninth  ^Itgument^  mfill  men  ^ith  doubts.  p.  1 47 

A»ffPerid. 

His  tenth  Argument.  P-H9 

Of  the  reconili*:g  of  Paul  and  James.  p  1 5 o-  &c. 

Letters  thatpaft  burvrcntkis Rtvtnnd'Brotherandme.  p.  157 
In  vhich  ut  difcud'fd  the  Argument  from  Abrahams  fujlifica- 
tion.     ^nd  in  the  lafl  Letter  thefe  ^ueftions. 
l.fVhethir  vidcre,audi.e  ,  be  on'y  Grammatical aBtont,  and 
'  Phjficd  T>afftonf.  P- 1 94,^C- 

2.  Whether  Be!  eving  be  only  (0^  and  credere  onlf^m.    p  1 98 

3.  pyketherF.ahbe  l\TiveinitsInJ}ru>r.enta!itj.        ^  P ,^^7 

4.  Whether  the  Opponents  WaymAkenot  ether  Graces  as tfcpir 
Inflrumentt  of  fufiif cation.  -r  rfr^'"^^^ 

5.  whether    f^ith  be  a  proper  Infirument  of  Jnjtipcaijn. 

p.2l2 

6.  Queflion.  If  Faith  be  an  Infirument^  whether  it  ju/Lfie 
primarily  and  proxtmc  as  fuehrer  as  an  apprehenfion  oj  Ch.ijl 
orR^ghteoufyieis,  P-^^H 

7»  Jlucllion,  \S'hich  is  the  mere  clear  Jafe  and  certain  Doarme. 

'    '^^  ^  p.220 

Repentance,  yihether  exelnded.  P'^^7 

'^  (bi)  Of 


The  Contents. 

of  Faith  relatively  taken,  p.2z8 

Of  thrt  AJfttnlflies  Dejinietion  of  faith.  p«*30 

The  Judgement  of  Jome  Divines.  p •  *  3  ?  ,^^ 

rfihether  a  dying  man  may  look,  on  hit  own  A^J  Atthe^ondir 

tiont  of  the  Covenant  performed.  P»'4  ^ » ^f^' 

Further  Explications,  9.244.^*^. 


Difputation  3. 


WHether  "Befides  the  Right eottf»eft 
of  Chrifi  impu  ted^  there  be  a  per- 
fonal evangelical  Right eoufnefs  »r- 
te(farj  to  Juflification  and  Salvation  ?  Affir.  p-  25  9 

Dijiinnions  and  Proportions  Negative  and  -Affirmative  for  ex* 
plication,  Pt260y^c 

^Proved.  p,266. 

Ol>jeSiotit  anf^fred.  p^269,C^C.. 

Mr.yVAVTiQi'i  Arguments  confuted.  P'27J 

/9  28$ 

Mr,  Warner's  i  j*  chap,  confuted  about  Juflijicatien^  and  the . 

Inter efi  of  Obedience ,  &c  p.286  . 

Mafier  Warner's  ty^rguments  anfvfered,  by  T»hich  he^ould 

exclude  Chriji  asKing^  &c.  from  being  theObjt^  «/)**[/?»• 

'fpȣf'*if^'  P-,293-  ^^' 

The  other  chief  pajfages  in  hi^  Sookjconftdered,  p.  305,(^. 

His  difiinElion  of  fides  quae  &  qua.  p.  3 o  Sjd'r, 

His  Preface anf'^tredtn  an  Eptjili,  P«3iJ, 


Mnfiir 


The  C  O  N  T  E  N  T  St 


MR.  John  Tombe's ,  hit  friendly  y^nimadverfions  on 
my  Aphorifms^  mth  a  Difcujfion  of  them.  .      p.  3  2  2 
fftfiification  tn  Law.title  hythe  Tromife  fnllj  vin- 
tlicated.  P-?52,«:^tf, 

Whether  fujiificatioft  be  a  conti^us^  A[l^  or  bnt  one  AH.  p.541 

&c. 

whether  Faith  comprise  Love,  Stib'jstlion  or  ether  Qracei .    at 

large.  P.HS&C. 

whether  Fdith  be  only  in  the  Intell(Si,or  alfo  in  the  WUl,  p.3  ^4, 

&c. 
ftf(iifying  Faith  receiveth  Chriji  as  Lord,  &c.  P« 3  5  8 

it  it  Faith,  and  not  only  Love  ,  or  other  Graces,  by  which  the 
Will  receiveth  Chri/h  P-  5 6 1  &c. 

The  Cj  ojpel  is  a  Lavf.  p. 3  69,&c. 

Repentance  neceffary  to  fftji ideation,  p.370,&c. 

Ho'^  Faith  ju/iifieth.  P-377 

whether  Chriji  had  a  Title  on  €arth  to  Rule.  P-  3  7^ 

Of  Chrijis  univerfal  dominion  and  Redemptiott.  p.  3  80 

Afore  of  the  Jttftification  by  the  Gofpel-  Promife.  p.  3  84 

Of  Preparatives  to  fufiification.  p.  3  87 

what  Paul  excludeth  as  oppofite  to  faith  in  J ujlip  cation.  p.39r. 

Of  Intercifioftt  of  Jujiificationi  andthe  gmlt  of  particttUr  (ins. 

p.393,e^r. 


Difputation  ^, 


WHether  the  Faith  which  Paul  oppofeth  to 
fporkjin  fttjitfication^beone  only  Phyftcal 
ASi  of  the  SohI  ?  Or,  Whether  all  Hu- 
mane AUsi  except  one  Phyfical  Afi  of  Faith,  be  the  Veorkj  Vrhich 
Paul  excludeth  from  fujiijication  ?  N«g.  p'39P 

The  ^uefiionoftntdi  and  its  fro-i^d  that  this  Faith  is  not  one  on* 

(ki)  If 


The  Contents* 

iff  yf 5.  X .  Eithtr  Numtr icsU;,  2,0ref  4n inftrior GenHt^ 
fo  41  to  he  of  ont  only  Faculty  :  Nor  only  God  tht  Father^ 
Chrift,  'f  romtfi'PartioM,Hea  vtnJtCQ.  tbi  Oh^tU.  3 .  Nor  in 
rpccic  fpefi€liUJina,^rtfWi^  muny  Argumtnts, 


Errata. 


Errata. 


PAge  6.  line  ij.  read  that  I.  p,  ii.Kio.r.fute ChriHum.  pA^./.^.r.prom'nentl'.  I  • 
iJ.r.hath.p.ii.'.^.T/uthis.li'i.r.proofof..  p  if.'.i^.r.bctbe.  l-H-f'*^"''  P'^i* 
l.i7.r.ffc<:rib»«.  p.i4./.35.r.r/j«'.  p.ip  l.t^.r. though,  p.jz.'.jz  r.w«/7/'f  p.?9. 
l.6.r-with.  p.^^.t.j.r.Ineed.  p.^^.'.io.  .Commmttion.  p.Ji.'.  i  i.r.<«j.  p.55./i6.r. 
noflyi.^'li't.exclu/ton.  p.64J.jo.r.r«'/"f.  p.74-'.'^.r.cJWfi^w.  p.8  i./.i  j.'.«o.  I.20. 
r./<^'«  ^%^-i6.b'MoutagAin(l.  p.97. 1. ii.r.th-it  is. I.  i^.r. execution,  p.88./.  iz.  read 
r;be>'c-p.94. /.io.r.7>fl/io«.  p  95  l.i.r.u.l.^-r.yo.ri-.  p.99.  l.i<).x.ai  mediate  it*  p.i  19.?, 
l6.x.as.  p.ii^,'.^  r.that  hehsthnol.  p.i  j6.  /,i8.r  Cb>ift.  p-i?9  /. i  J.r. flwftf«j.page 
1  Si.^  17. r.  bien.p.\(>6  l.iS.r.  rve  m:y.  p.i^B.r.Gorfx.  p.i7o7.r7.r  /Jgw.  p.175.^  15. 
T.divers.  p.i79.l.i9.>.he  thHrvj  ifet  «o/.  p.i'^o.A4.r.or.  p.i8  j.'.i9.r.cd,''«-</'j.p.i857. 
i^.x.fcnju.p.i()7.l.i9.x.'Potentia.  p.io8.f,8.r.  Forrct.\.i\ .x.'B afjive in.p.zio  I  14.0 
Tncdiantc.p.z\x.l.iz.T.cx'.ept.p.  ijj./.7.r.i«  ifef.p.i45.l  p.  blot  out  fi/'.p.  iji/.i?. 
t.veritatu.  p. 1 5 7.^ ' 4.r  exalted.p. t7 1 V.  1  o,  .righteous.p. li^.l.x 7.r.hc.\^  1 4. r  t/^f .p. 
290./.i.r.wj>'fc.p.2  94./.2i.and/.i6.andf.z6^/.2j-3nd  z6.  iot.qute r.qua.p.^^^.l. 
l.r.unprovedp.  Ii^.'.l6.r.cull.p  i^9.'.i^.x.tbat  u.  p.^io.l.,^ -.fur.  p.^i6  l.^i.  r. 
/r«if. p.3$4-/olt.r.pr(W3^fl;?f. p  j6o./, ij.r  G3d.p.i6i.l.ix.i.thought.p,i^6.'.i7.r. 
lilt  mt.p.i^j.l.iz.xfanHificAtuin.  p.i^o.'.ii.r. morally,  p. j98.^  1  ^.x.probAkeA.i^  . 


^!ii«^'i^«  si^ii^'-^r^ii*^'  m^^v  '-1^  'W^dW, 


CO 


Queft.  Whether  vpe  are  fujlified  by 
^eliveing  in  fefus  Chri/l^as  our  ]{ing 
and  Treacher  •  as  we/las  by  believing 
in  his 'Blood:      Aff. 


Hough  I  have  oft  fpoken  to  thi?  Qiicftlon 
^  in  the  ears  of  the  world  ,  as  taking  it  to  be 
of  very  great  Confequence  ^  yer  upon  the 
Invitation  of  this  opportunity,  1  (hall  once 
again  attempt  a  brief  Difcuilion  of  it  ; 
and  the  rather,  becaufe  the  Anfwers  of  a 
Reverend  Brother  (Mr.  Bi^kf  )  to  my  for-^ 
mer  Arguments,  and  his  Arguments  for  the 
contr.irv  opinion,  may  wrong  the  Truth  and  the  fouls  of  men , 
if  their  Fallacy  be  not  manifefted  by  a  Reply. 

Andlfliallfirft  fpeak  fomewhac  of  the  Importance  of  the 
Queftion,  and  thenof  thefcnfe  ofit,  and   then  endeavour  a 

B  cleat 


CO 


ckar  RcfolutioD,  and  the  Confirmation  thereof ,  and  the  Con- 
futation of  the  contrary  conceits. 

And  for  the  firft,  I  fhall  give  you  my  thoughts  of  it  in  thef€ 
two  Propofitions. 

Propoftioft  I.  The  difference  amongft  Proteftants  about  this 
Queftion  is  not  of  fo  great  moment,  that  either  party  muft  Eo 
romins  be  judged  to  deny  the  Eflentisls  (  or  Fundamentals )  of 
the  faith,and  fo  to  be  of  a  different  Rchgion  from  the  other,  or 
to  fall  fliortof  Salvktion. 

I  lay  down  this  Propofition  firft,  Bccaufe  of  the  Papifts  who 
ftand  looking  upon  all  our  differences  with  a  mind  too  like  the 
raind  of  the  Devil ;  rejoycing  in  them ,  and  endeavouring  to 
encreafe  them,  and  to  make  them  feem  greater  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world  than  indeed  they  are,  that  fothcy  may  make  ufe  of  thera 
for  the  reproaching  of  our  Profeflion ,  and  take  an  advantage 
from  them  to  make  the  truth  and  Servants  of  Chrift  become 
odious  unto  others* 

Secondly,  And  I  do  it  alfo  for  the  fake  of  fome  C  even  too 
raany^  among  our  fclves,  that  fpcak  of  controverfics  as  they  arc 
concerned  in  thcm,or  as  the  party  to  whom  they  joyn  doth  fpeak 
of  them,  or  as  they  appear  to  them  in  the  dark,  or  at  a  diftancc, 
or  upon  a  hafty  fuperficial  fearch ;  but  have  not  the  skil  (  nor 
fome  of  them,  the  wilU  to  open  the  true  ftate  of  a  Controver- 
fic,  and  make  the  difference  appear  no  wider,  then  indeed  it  is. 

To  the  proving  of  the  Propofition,  it  muft  be  obfetved,  Firft, 
ihat  the  Affirmers  do  yield,  that  it  is  not  the  Dodrine  or  Go- 
vernment of  Chrift.  but  his  blood  that  is  the  Ranfome  for  our 
fins,  and  his  RighteoufneA  that  is  the  folc  Meritorious  Caufe  of 
our  Juftification  :  and  th?.t  believing  in  Chnfl  as  Psophet  and 
King,  isnotaproper  Inftrun^ent  of  our  Juftificarion;  and  that 
Chrift  as  a  Ranfome  for  us,  and  a  deferver  of  our  juftification, 
is  the  formal  Obje(3  of  that  other  ad  (  which  accordingly  bc- 
lieveth  in  him,  )  and  not  of  this  ad  of  believing  in  him  as  Pro- 
phet ar.d  King. 

On  the  other  fide,  it  is  granted  by  ihcm  that  are  for  the  Ne- 
gative, th?t  it  is  our  duty  to  believe  in  Chrift  as  a  Prophet  and 
King  nnd  thar  it  is  of  ncccfiity  to  falvation,  yea  to  juftification 
it  fclf  J  For  they  yield  that  it  is  the  FUts  ^na  Jufiifcat/.hQ  faith 


C3) 

by  whch  we  arc  JuRified  ;  but  not  qna  Jft/Iificat^  or  that  it  Ju- 
ftificth  not  ^»A  talU^  as  fuch  :  They  yield  alfo  that  it  is  a  Con- 
dition of  Jultification ,  for  fo  they  confcfs  that  Repentance  it 
felf  is  •  but  they  only  fay,  that  it  is  not  the  Inftrument  of  Julti- 
fication,  as  they  think  the  other  ad  is.    So  that  the  difference  is 
here  :  They  yield  all  that  we  affirm(  if  I  can  underftand  thenii ) 
but  they  affirm  fomewhat  more  thcnif'elves ,   which  we  do  not 
yield  :    Ihcy  grant  that  believing  in  Chrilt  as  our  Teacher  and 
Lord  is  a  Condition  of  our  juftincation,and  ihefidts  ^H£  fftfti- 
feat ;  which  is  all  that  I  dcfire  :  I'Ut  then  they  add,  that  the  Be- 
lief in  ChriUs  blood  and  Righteoufnefsis  the  Inftrunsent  of  our 
Juftification,  and  that  it  jnitifieth  ^«<»;^i/(;<  •  which  we  utterly/ 
deny,    if  the- words  be  properly  taken ;  and  Tropes  fliould  not 
upon  choice  be  made  the  terms  of  our  Queftion  ,  while  there 
are  plainer  to  be  had.     So  that  by  this  time  its  eafie  to  fee  that 
neither  of  thcfe  opinions  are  fuch  as  muft  unchurch  or  damn  us, 
or  raakeusHereticks.    Fid},   We  that  are  for  the  Affirmative 
are  out  of  that  danger;  for  we  hold  no  more  pofitivelv  then  is 
yielded  us  by  the  orher.    AH  that  they  can  charge  us  with,  is  this 
Negative,  that  [  believing  in  Chrifts  blood  doth  not  properly 
Juftifie  as  an  Inftrument    ( that  is,  as  an  efficient  Inftrumentai 
Caufeof  our  Juftification)  nor  yet  <jua  talU:'^  And  I  think 
they  will  not  lay  our  falvation  on  the  Affirmative  ,  when  they 
confider  tvhat  we  yield  (  of  which  more  anon)  And  on  the  other 
fide,  we  are  far  from  palling  any  damning  fentence  on  them  that 
are  for  the  faid  Inftrumentality ;  efpecially  as  we  perceive  it 
commonly  held.    Let  no  Papift  therefore  infult  over  us  and  fay, 
we  are  difagreed  in  our  fundamentals,unlefs  he  be  refolved  to  do 
it  in  defign  againi'r  cb:  light  of  his  own  confcience.    I  the  rather 
premife  this  Caution,    becaufe  I  hear  that  theJP-ipifts  do  mucter 
thus  againft  us  already  to  filly  people  that  cannot  fee  their  de- 
ceit :  They  fayX  Is  not  the  death  ofChrift  a  fundamental  ?  and 
yet  fome  fay  that  he  died  for  All,  and  feme  fay  he  died  only  fcr 
thcElcd;  fome  fay  he  paid  x\\t  Idem,  and  f  me  but  the  Tan- 
tptrtdem  ]  but  they  tell  not  the  people  the  true  ftate  of  the  Con- 
troverfie,and  wherein  we  are  agreed, or  r  hat  they  differ  as  much 
about  the  extent  of  the  death  ofChrift  among  themfelves, 
without  fuch  a  charge.    Chrift  if:  the  Foundation :  but  yet  whe- 

B  z  cher 


(+) 


ther  his  hair  were  cut,  or  not ,  or  whether  he  were  thirty  three  or 
thirty  five,  or  fifty  years  old  when  he  died  J  or  whether  he  was 
buried  in  a  Garden,  or  in  a  Sepulchre  of  ftone,  thcfc  are  not  the 
foundation.  So  much  to  the  firft  Propofition  for  narrowing  our 
difference. 

Propofition  2.  Though  this  controverfie  be  not  of  fuch  Mo' 
ment  as  is  denied,  yet  is  it  of  great  weight,  and  the  Confequcnts 
of  the  Errors  of  one  party  hereabout,  are  fuch,  as  if  chey  were 
held  praflically  and  after  the  proper  fenfc  of  their  exprcfsions, 
would  be  a  great  hinderance  to  falvationjf  not  plainly  hazard  it. 
And  therefore  the  queftion  is  not  to  becaftby,  as  needkfsor 
unproticablc.  It  is  fo  neer  the  great  matters  of  our  Redemp- 
tion, Juftification,and  the  nature  of  faith  ,  that  it  is  it  felf  the 
greater.  And  if  Antefim  fay  true.that  truths  are  fo  concatenat- 
ed, that  every  Error  rauft  by  confequence  overthrow  the  foun- 
dation, then  it  muft  be  fo  in  this.  The  confcquents  (hall  be  men- 
tioned anon  in  the  Arguments,  where  it  will  be  more  feafonable. 
And  in  great  matters,  it  is  not  a  contemptible  Error  which  con- 
fifteth  but  in  mif  naming  and  mif-placing  them  :  It  is  a  very 
great  help  to  the  clear  and  full  underftanding  of  fruths.to  have 
right  Notions  and  Methods.  And  the  contrary  may  prove  dan- 
gerous to  many  others,  when  the  particular  Patrons  of  thofe 
miftakcsmay  bein  nodanger  by  them.  For  perhaps  their  firft 
Notions  may  be  righter  than  their  fccond  ;  and  they  may  not 
fee  the  confequcnts  of  their  miftake^;  and  yet  when  fuch  mi- 
ftakesin  terms  and  methods  fhall  be  commended  to  the  world, 
other  men  that  hear  and  re.id  their  words,  and  know  not  their 
hearts  and  better  apprehcnfions,  are  like  enough  to  take  them 
in  the  raoft  obvious  or  proper  (cnfe,  and  byoaediforder  to  be 
led  to  more,  and  to  fwallow  the  Confequencs  as  well  as  the  mif- 
ieading  Premifes.  And  therefore  I  rauft  needs  fay, chat  this  point 
appearcth  of  fuch  momenc  in  my  cyes,that  I  dare  not  defert  that 
which  I  confidently  take  to  be  the  Truth,  nor  facrifice  it  to  the 
honor  or  plcafure  of  man 

For  the  explication  ofth;  terms  it  is  needlefs  to  fay  much, and 
I  have  nei  her  time  for,  nor  mind  of  needlefs  work.  By  {J-tifii- 
fi?(ition  ]  here  we  mean  nai;eithcr  Sanguification  alone,or  fandi- 
fication  ani  rcmiffian  conjunct  as  making  up  our  Right-^oufnefs, 

as 


••••  If  t  MY  r  ~  >, ' 

.astbc  Papiftsdo  :  ( though  wc  deny  not  but  fometkncthe  word 

jmay  be  fuunu  in  Scripture  in  fome  fuch  fenfe  :  )  For  thus  it  is 
patl  coritrovtrfie  that  our  Juttification,  that  is,  our  fandificati- 
on  as  to  all  that  followeth  laith,  is  as  much,  if  not  much  more, 
from  our  belief  in  Chnft  as  Teacher  and  King,  as  from  our  be- 
.lief'inhira  as  a  Ranfome.  But  by  Juftirication  we  mean  that 
Relative  Change  which  Proteltants  ordinarily  mean  by  this 
word  i  which  we  need  not  here  define. 

The  Prcpofition  \  B)  ]  (^when  we  fpcak  of  being  juftificd  by 
faith  )  is  not  by  all  men  taken  in  the  fame  fenfe.    tirft,  Some- 
time Its  ulcd  more  ftridly  and  limitedly  to  fignifie  only  aneffi- 
ciency,or  the  Incereft  of  an  Efficient  caufe.    And  thus  fome  Di- 
vines do  feem  to  take  ic,    when  they  fay  that  we  are  juQified  by 
faith  in  Chrifts  blood  and  Righteoufnefs,  and  not  by  faith  in  him 
asa  Teacher  or  a  Lord  :  wh.ch  occafioncth  the  Papif^s  to  fay 
our  dlflf.rence  is  wider  then  indeed  it  is  :  For  the  word  f /Z?*! 
hath  an  ambrguity     and  in  their  fence,  we  yield  their  Nrgative 
though  not  their  Affirmative,  in  the  laft  mentioned  condufion. 
Secondly,  Somerimi-  the  wocd  j  By']  is  ufed  to  (igmfie  a  Condi- 
tional(ty,or  thelntcreft  of  a'rondicion  only  in  fpecisJ.     And 
thus  we  take 't  when  wC  explain  our  felves  in  what  manner  it  is 
that  weare  jul^'fied  by  faith,   and  by  thefe  queilioned  ads  in 
particular.  And  thtrefore  thofe  Protcflants  thatdifpute  againft 
us  who  are  for  the  Affirmative,  do  ( if  I  undcrfland  them  )  deny 
only  the  propriety  of  the  phrafe  which  wcufe,  but  nottfie  ikwg 
or  fenfe  wh-.ch  we  cxpre's  by  it ;  for  they  grant  that  thefe  ads  ot 
faith  are  Conditions  of  our  Juftification,  when  they  have  never 
fo  much  difputed,  that  we  are  not  juf^.fied  b;  them,   ;;nd  foa 
fmall  fyllable  of  two  letters,  is  much  of  the  matter  of  their  con- 
troverfie.  s  ;  ;-,J  . 

Thirdly,  fcmet ime  this  word  is  ufed  to  fignifie  the  Interefl  of 
any  other  caufe  as  well  as  the  Efficient,  and  that  eithtr  general- 
ly, orefpfcially  of  fome  one.  This  Paper  is  white  !Sf^  the  white- 
nefs  as  the  fo-^mal  caufe  :  we  are  moved  to  a  godly  life  By  Gud 
and  falvationas  the  final  caufe  ere. 

Fourthly,    Sometime  the  term  {_  Bj  '^  is  taken  yet  more 
.largely  i  a?id  fitly  enough  )  for  1.II  or  any  'J\4eans  in  Genera! 
or  the-ntercflof  anj  means  in  the  attainment  of  the  End.  And 

B   3  fo 


/v2 


fo  it  comprehcndeth  all  Caufcsj,  eventhofe  Per  accident  and 
Conditions  ai  well  as  ^..r.u.c,,  an  all  that  doth  but  remove  im- 
pediments. And  in  thiscompr  hcmve  fenfc  we  take  it  here 
in  the  Qicrt- >n,  hough  who  i  we  come  to  determine  what« 
the  fpccial  ln:ereft  of  fait'a  in  Jufli^cation,  I  take  ic  in  the 
fccond  lenfe. 

Take  notice  alfo.  That  I  purpofciy  here  ufe  this  phrafe 
[[we  are  Juft.fied  b.  Believing;,  or  by  Faith  J  ra' her  chanthefe, 
([  jaftifying  faith  ]  or  Q  Faich  doth  juftifi  *  us.  ]  And  \  here 
fbretellyou,thatiti  (hall  ac  any  time  ufe  thefe  laft  expreilions, 
as  led  to  it  by  thofe  with  whom  Ideal,  it  is  but  in  the  fenfeas  is 
hereafter  explained.     The  Reafons  why  I  choo/e  to  ftickto 
this  phrafe,  rather  then  other,   arcj     Firft,  Bccaufe  this  only 
is  the  Scripture  phrafe,   and  [he  other  is  not  found  m  Scripture  •, 
(  that  I  remember  j  It  is  never  faid,  that[[  Faith  doth  jufti- 
fieus  ]  though  it  be  faid  that  [_  weare  Juftified  by  faith.]  And 
if  any  will   affirm,  that  I  may  ufe  that  phrafe  which  is  not 
found  in  Scripture,  he  cannot   fay,  T  muft  ufe  it.     And  in  a 
Controverted  cafe  ,   cfpecially^bout  fuch  Evangelical  truchf, 
the  fafety  of  adhering  to  Scrf^cure  phrafe.  ajid  the  danger  of 
departing  from  itisfo  difcernablc»  ("and  fpecially  when  men 
make  great  ufe  of  their  unfcriptural  phuafes  for  the  countenan- 
cing of  their  opinions, )  I  have  the  more  reafon  to  be  caiite- 
lous.     Secondly,    Becaufc  the  phrafes  are  not  alwaies  of  one 
and  the  fame  fignification.The  one  is  more  comprehcnfive  then 
the  other,  if  ftridtly  taken.  To  be  juftified  by  faith  ]  is  a  phrafe 
extenfive  to  the  Intereft  of  any  Medium  whatfocver:    And 
there  are  Media  which  are  not  Caaifes.     But  when  we  fay  that 
[[Faith  doth  juflifie  us  ]  or  call  it  [  juftifying  Faith  J  we  ex« 
prefs  t  Caufality,  if  we  take  the  word  ftriSly.    Though  this 
laft  phrafe  may  fignifie  the  Intereft  of  a  bare  Condition,  yet 
not  fo  properly  and  without  ftraining  as  the  former.    The  Re- 
verend Author  of  the  feond  freacife  of  Juftirtcation,  is  of  the 
fame  mind  as  to  the  ufe  of  the  rcrms;but  he  conjedures  another 
reafon  for  the  Scipture  ufe,  then  I  fhall  ever  be  perfwaded  of, 
vi:tj.  that  it  is  becaufe  Cr^s'^r^  is  not  Ag^ere^hMl  Tati ;   to 
Believe  is  to  Stffer,  and  not  to  AB  ■  that  it  is  a  grammaticall 
ABiont  but  Phyfically  a  Pajfion.     Though  I  think  this  no  truer, 

then 


(7) 


then  that  my  brains  arc  made  of  a  looking  glafs,  and  my  heart 
of  marblCjyet  is  there  fomwhat  m  this  Reverend  mans  opinion, 
that  looks  toward  the  truth  afar  off.  For  indeed  it  intimateth 
that  as  to  Caufalicy  or  Erticiency;  faith  is  not  Adive  in  the 
juftifying  of  afinner,  but  is  a  meer  condition  or  moral  difpo- 
lition,  which  is  necedary  to  him  that  will  be  in  the  neareft 
Capacity  ro  be  juftifyed  by  God. 

The  laft  words,  [^  Believing  in  his blooi~\  I  ufenotasthe 
only  way  that  is  taken  by  the  Opponents ;  but  as  one  inftance 
among  divers.  For  they  ufe  to  cxprefs  themfelves  fo  varioully, 
as  may  caufc  us  to  think  by  manyc  as  we  know  it  of  fome  )  that 
they  take  more  waics  then  oie  in  oppofing  us.  Firft,  Some  of 
them  fay, that  the  only  Adof  faith  that  juftifieth,  is  our  believ- 
ing in  Chrifts  blood,  or  fuffe rings,  or  humiliation.  Secondly, 
Others  fay,  IhitiCis  the  bclievmg  in,  or  apprehending,  and 
refting  on  his  whole  Rfghteoufnel's ,  even  his  Obedience  as 
Obedience,  to  be  it  felf  imputed  tons.  Thirdly,  Other  Re- 
verend Divines  fay,  that  it  is  the  apprehending  and  refting  on 
bis  Habitual  as  well  as  Active  and  Paflive  Righteoufnefs ;  that 
hisHabirsmay  be  imputed  to  us,  as  our  Habitual  Righteouf- 
nefs, and  his  Afls  as  our  adive  Righteoufnefs ;  in  both  which 
together  we  are  reputed  perfedFulfill-jrsof  the  Law  ;  and  his 
fufferings  as  our  Satisfadion  for  our  breaking  the  Law.  As 
for  rhofe  that  mention  the  Imputation  of  his  Divine  Righte- 
oufnefs CO  us,  they  are  fo  few,  and  thofe  for  the  raoft  part 
fufpeftedofunfoundnefs,  thati 'vlllnot  niiqiber  it  among  rhe 
Opinions  of  Protcftants.  Fourthly,Others  fay,thar  rhe  jaftifying 
Ad  t if  Faith  is  not  theapprehenfiorofChriltsR'ghreoufneJsor 
Ranfome  i  but  of  his  Perfon,  and  that  only  as  he  is  Ptielt, 
and  not  as  Prophet  or  King.  Fifthly,  Others  chink  thai  it 
is  the  apprehenfion  of  Chrifls  perfon,  but  not  in  his  innrc 
Pr'ieftly  office  j  for  he  performcch  fome  Aft^  of  his  P  ieftly 
office  for  us  (  Interceffion  )  after  wc  are  )uft;fied  :  Therefore 
it  is  hi- Perfon  only  as  the  Satisfierof  f^ftice,  and  Meritor  of 
Life,  which  they  make  the  adequate  Objedcf  the  jaftifvitig 
Ad  of  Faith,  Sixthly,  Others  fay,that  it  is  both  his  Perfon  ard 
his  facisfadion,  Merit,  RighteoufncN,  ye)*,  Pardon  an.i  ju(U- 
ficAtion  It  felf,  that  is  the  adequate  Objcd  :   By  which  thty 

muft- 


CO 

muft  needs  grant  that  it  is  not  one  onlyfingle  Af^,  but  many. 
Seventhly.  One  Reverend  man  thats  now  with  C^od  (  Bifhop 
V  flier  J  undcrftanitng  c!uc  I  was  engaged  in  th  sControverfie, 
did  of  his  own  accord  acquiint  me  wiai  h  s  Judgement,  as  tend- 
ing to  rcconcih.ition  :  A'dbccaulcl  never  heard  sny  other  of 
the  fame  fninJ,and  it  h.ach  2  coi.ficifij^ble  alped,  I  (hall  briefly 
and  truly  reporr  it  ashe  expeflidit.-  He  cMd  me,  thac  there 
arc  two  Ads  (or  lort  ol  Ad>  )  ol  F  lirh.  B  tht  firrt  we  receive 
the  Perfoniji  Chrift.  ds  a  woman  i.i  M  irrj  :ge  doth  firit  receive 
the  Terfon  of  her  Husband  Thi«  is  our  Implanration  'nco  hrift 
the  true  Vine  ,  and  givesi  us  thar  U  i  n  wich  him  which  muft  go 
b(;fore  Gommunion  and  Comu.untc^arfon  of  his  Graces,  and 
fo  before juftidcation.  The  fecond  of  Faihs  AAs  are  thofe 
thac  apprehend  the  Benefits  which  he  offerech ;  Of  which 
Juftification  is  one, and  this  is  ftTidly  rhe  'uftifym^  AA  of  Faith, 
and  followeth  the  former.  Soth^t  i^  faiJ  ht )  it  is  true  that 
the  firft  Ad  which  appiehendech  Cb  ft'  perfoti  doch  cake  him 
as  King,  Prieft,  and  Propber.  as  Hira  \  -nd  Huib -nd  rhat  v^-e  may 
be  united  to  him  ••  but  the  following  ad-  which  Rereivt  hl^  .Be- 
nefits do  not  fo,  but  are  fuited  to  the  feveral  benefits.  ]" 

The  opinion  is  fubt'.le,  and  I  perce.ved  by  his  Readincfs  in  it, 
thac  it  was  one  of  his  old  ftudicd  points,  and  chat  he  had  been 
long  of  that  mind  ;  my  anfwer  to  him  was  this  .•  [You  much 
confirm  me  in  what  I  have  received :,  for  you  grant  the  principal 
thing  that  T  defire  j  but  you  add  fomcthing  more  which  I  cannot 
fully  ciofe  with,  but  fhall  plainly  tell  you  what  are  my  apprehen- 
(ions  of  it.  Firft,  You  grant  that  the  ad  of  faith  by  which  we 
are  united  to  Chrift,  and  which  goe  firft,  is  the  Believing  in ,  or 
Receiving  whole  Chrift  as  Pneft,  Prophet,  and  King.  This  will 
do  all  thac  I  defire.  Secondly,  You  add,  chat  another  ad,even 
the  Receiving  of  his  Righteoufnefs  is  after  neccffary,  that  we 
may  be  juftified  Your  reafon  feems  to  be  drawn  from  the  dif- 
ference of  the  cffeds :  Union  goe^  before  Juttification,therefore 
the  unumg  ad  goes  before  the  juftify'ng  ad.  This  is  it  that  I 
deny  -  Mv  Reafons  are  thefe.  Firft, Scriprurediftinguiflrech  be- 
tween our  Union  with  Chrift  and  our  Juft  fication-.but  no  where 
between  the  uniting  and  juftitying  ads  of  faith.  SecondlvtThc 
nature  of  the  thing  reqaireth  it  not ,    becaufe  faith  juftifies  not 

by 

\ 


Cp) 


by  a  Phyfical  ca  ofality,  as  fire  warmeth  me  ;   but  by  the  moral 
intereft  of  a  condition  :  and  the  fame  ad  may  be  the  Condition 
of  divers  benefits.     Thirdly,  Scripture  hath  exprefly  made  the 
Receiving  of  the  perfon  in  his  Relations  to  be  the  Condition  of 
the  participation  of  his  benefits :  Q  As  many  as  received  him^x.o 
them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  fons  of  God;  fohni.ii. 
whoever  believeth  in  him  Pj.j.II  not  periP},  but,  &c.  beltive  in  the 
Lordjefus^andthou  Jhdi  he  fuved^^Q.'^    Fourthly,  Your  own 
Similitude  clearcth  what  I  fay  :  Though  the  wife  have  not  fo^ef- 
/ton  of  all  that  is  her  husbands  as  foon  as  (he  is  married  ^    yet 
ilie  hath  Fi^ht  to  ajj  that  is  her  part ,  and  pcfTcflion  of  the  bene- 
fits mceriy  Relative,  which  confift  but  in  a  Ri^ht.  1  he  accepting 
his  perfon  in  marriage  is  the  condition  to  be  by  her  performed 
to  inflate  her  in  his  Honours  fo  far  as  fhe  muft  partake  of  them. 
When  fhe  is  made  a  wife  by  that  Confent ,  there  needs  not  any 
other  ad  before  fhe  can  benoble,honourable,a  Lady, a  Queen, 
&c:  For  the  former  was  the  full  condition  of  the  firft  pofTeffion 
of  this  benefit ;  and  the  benefit  immediately  refuiteth  from  the 
Union.  Fifthly,  I  conceive  that  thefe  two  ads  which  you  men- 
tion are  but  one  moral  work(though  divers Phjfical  ads)and  to 
be  done  without  any  interposition  of  time,  before  we  can  have 
Chrift  for  Union  or  Juftification.  For  the  end  is  Effential  to  Re- 
lations: and  he  that  receives  Chrift,  muft  take  himtofome  end 
and  ufe :  and  that  muft  be  to  Juftifie,  Reconcile  and  fave  him  ; 
to  bring  him  to  God  that  he  may  be  blefTed  in  him.     He  that 
doth  not  receive  Chrift  to  thf  fe  ends  ,    recciveth  not  Chrift  as 
Chrift,  and  therefore  cannot  b?  united  to  him;  and  he  that  doth 
thus  receive  him,  doth  both  thofe  a^s  in  one  which  \  on  require. 
Sixthly,  And  the  cafe  is  much  different  between  Phyfical  and 
Relative  benefits  :    For  its  true,  that  when  we  are  united  to 
Chrift,  we  may  have  after  need  of  renewed  ads  of  faith  to  adu- 
ate  the  Graces  of  the  Spirit  Inherent  in  us;    For  here  Ri^ht  is 
one  thing,  and  Po^ejjion  is  another  :  But  the  Relation  of  Son- 
(hip,  Juftification.  e^c.  arc  benefits  that  arife  from  the  promife 
or  free  Gifcby  a  meer  refulcancy  to  all  that  are  united  to  Chrift ; 
and  whoever  hsth  prefent  Right  to  them ,    even  thereby  hath 
poffelTion  of  them,  fo  that  this  anfwcreth  your  Reafon.    For 
there  is  no  fuch  diftance  of  time  between  our  Union  wi:h  Chrift 

C     •  and 


Cio) 

and  Juftification,  as  that  any  ads  of  our  own  mftft  interpofe  ; 
but  they  are  »»  todcm  tnflanti^  and  differ  only  in  order  of  nature. 
In  liim ,  we  prove  a  promife  of  pardon  to  all  that  receive  Chrilt 
himfelf,  and  believe  in  him  :  If  any  will  affirm  the  neccflity  of 
any  other  ad  before  we  can  be  juftified,  it  is  incumbent  on  them 
to  prove  it. 

This  was  the  fubflance  of  my  Anfwer,  to  which  the  Reverend 
Bilhop  faid  no  more  j  whether  fatisfied  or  not ,  I  cannot 
tell .  But  I  thought  meet  to  recite  his  J  udgemcnt,  both  becaufe 
it  comes  fo  neer  the  matter, and  becaufe  I  know  not  of  any  other 
that  faith  the  fame  orfo  much  of  fecming  ftrengch  againftus. 

Agiinft  all  thefe  fevcn  particular  Opinions,  lam  novvtode- 
fend  the  Thefis ,-  when  I  have  firft  told  you,  in  certain  diftin- 
ftions  and  propofitions,  how  much  I  grant,  and  what  I  deny  ; 
which  I  (hall  in  (hort  difpatch. 

A  nd  here  I  need  but  to  rchearfc  what  I  have  faid  already  to 
Mr.  Blake  ^  pflg.  3 . 4.  or  to  give  you  fome  (hort  account  of  my 
thoughts  to  the  fame  purpofe. 

Firft,  We  muft  not  confound  Juftification  by  Conftitution 
or  Guiftjand  juflification  by  the  Sentence  of  the  Judge,  and 
the  Execution  of  that  fentence ,  which  are  three  diftinfl 
things. 

Secondly ,  We  muft  not  confound  Juftification  with  the  aflii- 
ranceor  feeling  of  Juftification. 

Thirdly,  We  muft  diftinguifli  between  our  firft  Juftificati- 
on from  a  ftate  of  fin,  and  our  daily  Juftification  from  particu- 
lar Ads  of  fin. 

Fourthly,  Retween  thatwhirh  \s  neccflary  on  Chrifts  part, 
and  that  which  is  ncceffary  on  our  patt  to  our  Juftificati- 
on. 

Fiffhly,  Between  Chrifts  purchafing  our  Juftification,  and  his 
adual  juft  fying  of  us. 

Sixrhly,  Between  thefe  two fenfcs of  the  [)hra(c\  ji*fti fed hy 
faith']  z'iz.  as  by  an  efficient  Caufe,  or  as  a  meer  Condition. 

Seventhly,  Between  the  Caufality  of  faith  in  the  Phyfical 
tflFev'isof  fandification  on  the  foul,  and  its  conducing  to  the 
efficiry  of  the  Promife  in  our  Juftification. 
Propolition    i.  .Ex  pme  Chnjli^    We  eafily  grant  that 

iE 


c^o 


it  is  not  his  Teaching,  or  Ruling  us,  but  his  Ranfome  and 
Obedience  that  are  the  Meritorious  caufe  of  our  Juftification 
and  Salvation. 

Propofttion  2-  Therefore  if  Chr'i^  did  juRl  fie  us  per  troMitn 
cbje^li  apprehenfiln  the  neareft  fenfe,  as  the  Belief  of  facred 
Truths  doth  make  a  Qii^alitative  imprcflion  on  the  foul  in  our 
Sanftification,  and  the  exciting  and  ading  of  our  Graces  then 
I  fhould  confefi  that  it  is  only  that  A(S  of  Faith  which  is  the  ap- 
prehenfion  of  this  Objei5t,that  doth  help  us  direftly  to  the  bene- 
fit of  theObjed. 

Propofition  3.  But  it  is  not  fo ;  For   the  Objeft  juftlficth 
us  caufaily  by    way  of  Merit  and  Moral  procurement,  and 
the  benefit  of  that  Merit  is  partly  the  Promile  conveying  to  us 
Juftification,    and  partly  Juftification  conveyed  by  that  Pro- 
mi(e  (  not  to  fpeakno^v  of  other  benefits^  and  the  Promife 
conveyech  Juftification  by  Moral  Donation  as  a  deed  of  Gift, 
oraPardonto  aTraytor  :  Therefore  the  Gift  flowing  purely 
from  the  Will  of  the  Giver,  and  the  Promife  or  deed  of  Gift 
being  the  Immediate  Inftrumental  efficient  Caufe  of  ir,  as  it  is 
fgntim  voluntatu  Donat  ris  ■>  our  Belief  or  Apprehenfionfw4 
talis  cannot  juftific  us ,   nor  have  any  nearer  or  higher  inteteft 
in  our  Juftification,  then  to  be  the  Condition  of  it,  as  it  is  a 
free  Gift.     And  therefore   the  Condition  muft  be  judged  of 
by  the  will  of  the  Donor  cxpreflfed  in  his  Promife,  and  not 
immediately  by  the   conceits  of  men   concerning  its  natural 
agreeablenefs  to  the  Objcd  in  this  or  that  refped. 

PropofitioK  4.  Yea,  Even  (X parte  C^rifl if  though  he  Merit 
Juftification  by  his  Ranfome  and  Obedience,  yet  he annai/j 
jnfiijieth  us  as  King  of  his  Church,  and  that  in  regard  of  all 
the  three  forts  or  p:irts  of  Juftification.  He  givtth  itconfti- 
tucivcly  by  h;s  Promife,  as  Lord  and  Lefijlator  &r\d  Be>iefa^or, 
onthcfe  termsof  Grace.  UQ/eKte>!cethm  Juft,  as  ourjudg; 
and  he  cxecuteth  that  fentcnce  as  a  Jnfl  Judge,  governing  ac* 
Cording  to  his  Laws.  So  that  if  Faith  Aid  juftilie  ex  natura 
rei,  which  they  call  its  hflruweyttality ,  I  fee  not  yet  but  that 
theapprehenfionof  Chrift  as  Lord  and  Judge  maft  juftific  us, 
becaufe  the  Ohjcft  apprehended  doth  thus  juftifieu* 

Propofition    5.  I  eafily  grant  that  moutSayitlificJtio-:  or  the 

C2  exciting 


Cii) 


exciting  an i  exercifc  of  our  Graces,  the  cafe  ftandcth  as  the 

Opponents  apprehend  it  to  do  in  Juft  ficarion.      This  Interett 

ot  the  Aft  maft  be  judged  of  by  the  Objeft  apprehended. 

For  it  is  not  theBehef  o    a  Promife  that  feareth  us,  but  of  a 

Thrcitni  g-^  nor  the  Bchcf  of  a  ThreutnlMg  that  (^omforieth 

u«,but  of  a  Prom  fe.    For  here  the  Objed  worketh  immediately 

on  our  minds,  i>ey  m  dum  ob]eBi  apprehen/i :  But  in  Juftification  ic 

is  n  t  fo,  where  God  is  the  Agent  as  a  Donor,   and  there  can 

be  norhing  done  by  us,  but  in  order  to  ma'xeus  fit  Subjects; 

and  the  change  is  not  $lualitativt  by  an  Objed:  as  fuch,  but 

'KjUtivehy  2iFMnd<imeyit(tm  which  is  without  us  in  the  Gof- 

pel,  and  nothing  w'^^j/j  us  but  a  qualifying  Condition,  without 

which  it  will  not  be  done. 

Propofition  6.  Accordingly  i  cafily  grant,  that  the  Sf»fe,or 
Ji^uraHce  of  Juftification  in  our  Confciences  is  wrought  by 
the  Oh'jtB  as  an  Ob]ed: :  Becaufe  this  A^Hrance  is  a  part  of  our 
SanBification.  But  that  Objed:  is  not  direftly  Chrifts  Ranfome^ 
but  the  f^tfwji/f  through  his  blood,  and  our  oven  Faith  w\\\q\\ 
is  the  condition  of  that  Promife. 

Propofition  7.  I  cafily  grant  that  Faith  in  Chrift  as  Lord 
or  Teacher  of  the  Church,  is  not  the  Inftrumental  efficient  Caufe 
of  our  Juftification;  They  need  not  therefore  contend  againft  me 
in  this.  But  wthall  I  fay,  thaj^  faith  in  his  Prieft-hood  is  not 
the  Inftrumental  efficient  Caufe  neither  ;  though  I  allow  it  to 
have  a  nearer  ^^hyfical  Relation  to  the  Ranfomc  which  merit- 
crh  our  Juftification. 

Propofition  8.  Though  there  is  a  greater  fhcw  of  Reafonta 
affcrcthe  inrereftof  the  fing'e  Belief  in  Chnfts  Prieft  hood  , 
for  a  particular  ra^don^ihen  for  our  fir Jl general  Pardon;  yet  in- 
deed it  is  but  a  fhcw,even  there  alfo.For  it  is  not  only  the  apply- 
ing our  fel  cstohis  blood  or  Ranrome,but  it  isalfo  the  applying, 
ourfclvcs  to  whole  Cbr>ft  ,  to  make  up  the  whole  breach,  that 
is  the  Condition  ff  our  p*irticuUr  Pardon,  (  fo  far  a?  a  parti- 
cular Act  of  iathis  a  Condition)  which  though  it  be  not  a 
Retciving     hr.iU  for  Union  wiib  him,as  wc  did  in  the  beginning,, 
yet  is  it  a  receiving  him  ad koc  et  ftcundum  cfuid  ;  and  a  renewed. 
C  onfent  to  his  whole  Office,    and  adhefion  to  him  as  our  fpe- 
cial remedy  for  recovery  from  that  fall,    by  freeing  us  both-, 
from. the  giult:aud  ftain  of  Sini.  Propoft  om 


0}) 


Pr6pofi'i)n  9.  It  is  undoubtedly  the  duty  of  every  Sinner, 
in  the  fcnfe  of  his  guile  and  mifery.  to  fly  to  theRanfomeof 
Chrifts  blood  and  the  Merit  of  his  Obedience,  as  the  fatisfa- 
dionto  Gods  Juftice,  and  thePurchaftrof  our  Juftification. 
And  he  that  doth  not  this,  how  willing  foever  he  may  feem  to 
learn  of  Chr  ft  as  a  Mafter,  or  to  be  ruled  by  him,  yet  cannoc 
be  juftificd  or  favcd  by  hvn. 

Propjition  lo.  I  e.^fily  grant  that  F^ith^«'i  r;f;r//?«»?  PrtJ- 
phetam  et  Dominum  recipT^  doth  not  juftifie  i  but  only  ^Jis/r/ 
^hd  (^hrifttim  Trophetam  (^  Dommum  recipit^  (^  <fttd  tji  prom 
mijjioms  Conditio  prafli'a.  i'ut  then  I  fay  the  fame  alfoof 
Faith  in  Chrift  as  Priett,  or  in  his  Rightecufnefs, 

Having  exp^ained  n.y  meaning  mthefe  ten  Propofitions  for 
preventing  of  Objections  that  concern  not  the  Controverfie, 
but  run  upon  mift.ikes,  ^  Jha//  »o\\>  proceed  to  prove  the  Theiis, 
which  is  thi?. 

r  Thefis.  iVe  are  jafftfitdkj  ^od^  by  our 'Believing  in  Chri(i 
<^  asTeachir  and  Lord^  and  not  only  hj  ^tUevittg  itt  his  biood  or 
C  Right eoufnefs. 

Argument  i .  My  firft  Argument  (hall  be  from  the  Con- 
ceffionof  thofc  that  we  difputc  with.  They  commonly  grant 
us  the  point  contended  for :  I  hcrefore  we  may  take  ic  for  gran- 
ted by  them.  If  you  fay.  What  need  you  then  difpute  the  point, 
if  they  deny  ic  not  whom  you  difpute  with?  I  Anfwer,  fomc 
of  them  gran'  it ,  and  undcrftand  not  that  they  grant  it  us , 
becaufe  they  underft  ind  not  the  fenfe  of  our  Aflercion .  And 
fomeof  chemunderftind  th^tthcy  grant  it  in  our  fenfe,but  yec 
deny  it  in  another  fenie  of  their  own  ^  and  fo  make  ic  a  Itrite 
about  a  fylUble.  But  I  fhall  prove  the  ConceflioUj  left  fome  yec 
difcf  rn  ir  not. 

Jf  ir  be  granted  as,  that  Believing  in  JefugChrift  as  Lord 
and  Teacher,  isarea'p-irc  of  rhe  Condition  of  our  Juftifica- 
tion  then  is  itgnn'cd  us,  that  by  this  ^eleving  in  him  we  are 
juftfied>  as  by  a  <  ondition  (  which  is  our  fenlc,  and  all  t'lac 
wc  aflVrt  )  But  die  former  is  true  :  Therefore  fo  is  the  la- 
ter 

For  th?  p'onf  of  the  AnteceH^^nt  ^  which  is  nil  j  Firft,  Try 
whecheryouc^i  meet  widiiiny  Di  ineihat  dare  deny  i',  v«/ho 

C3.  believech: 


Cif) 


believeth  that  Falthis  the  Condicion  of  the  Covenant.Secondly, 
Ar,d    1  am  fure  their  wiitingi;do  ordinarily  confefs  it.     Their 
Doctrine  that  oppofe  u?,is,  i  hat  Faith  is  both  a  Condition  and 
an  inftrument  :   but  odier  Acts ,  as  Repentance  &c.  may  be 
Conditions,  but  not  Inltrumcnts.  Aud  thofe  that  have  waded 
j'o  far  in:o  chis  Controverfie,  feera  to  joyne  thefe  other  Aces  of 
Faith  wih  ths  Conditions, but  not  with  ihelnftrument.Thirdly, 
They  eiprefly  make  it  antecedent  to  our  Juftification,  as  of  mo- 
ral ncceflity,  ex  conjiitHHone permittentti-^  and  fay  it  is  the  Fidet 
qMajifttficat :  which  is  the  thing  defired,  if  there  be  any  fenfe  in 
the  word?.     Fourthly,  They  cannot  deny  toVaith  in  Chrift,  as 
Lord  and  Teacher,  that  which  they  commonly  give  to  Repen- 
tance, and  moft  of  them  to  many  other  Act?.     But  to  be  a 
Condition  (  or  part  of  the  Condition  )  of  Juitification  is  com- 
monly by  them  afcribed  to  Repentance  j  therefore  they  cannot 
deny  it  to  thefe  ads  of  faith.  So  that  you  fee  I  may  fairly  here 
break  off    and  take  the  Theju  fro  Co»cejfa,  as  to  the  fenfc. 
Nothing  more  can  be  faid  by  them,  but  againft  our  phrafe  whe- 
ther it  be  proper  to  fay  that  we  are  juftifiedBy  that  which  is 
but  a  bare  Condition  of  our  juftification,  which  if  any  will 
deny  .•  Firft,  We  fliall  prove  it  by  the  confcnt  of  the  world,that 
apply  the  word  [Bj/]  to  any  Medium:  And  Dr.  Trvifs  that  told 
them  (  contr.  (^orvinHm)o\cT  and  over  that  a  condition  is  a  Me- 
dium, though  it  be  not  a  caufe  ;    and  1  think  none  will  deny  it. 
Secondly  ,  by  the  confent  of  many  Texts  of  Scripture  :    But  this 
muft  be  referred  to  another  Difputation,    to  which  it  doth  hz- 
long,z//«..  about  the  Inftrumentality  of  faith  in  juftifying  us, 
which,  God  willing,!  intend  alfo  to  perform. 

9y4rgument  2.  The  ufual  language  of  the  Scripture,is,that  we 
are  juftificd  b/  faith  in  Chrift,  or  by  believing  in  him  ,  without 
any  exdufions  of  any  cffontial  part  of  that  faith.  But  faith  in 
Chrift  doth  efTentially  contain  our  believing  in  him  as  Teacher, 
Prieft,  and  King  or  Lord  :  therefore  by  believing  in  him  as 
Teacher,  Prieft  and  Lord, we  are  juftified.  : 

The  C^ajor  is  paft  the  denial  of  Cbriftians,  as  to  the  firft  part 
of  it.  And  tor  the  fecond  part,  the  whole  caufe  lycth  on  it ;  For 
the  ^//Kcr  alfo  is  niill  all  controverfie.  For  if  it  be  eftential  to 
Chrift  as  Chrift  to  be  God  and  man,  the  Redeemer,  Teacher, 

Prieft, 


C'5) 

Prieft  and  Lord :  then  it  is  eflcncial  to  faiLh  in  Chrift  ( by  which 
weare  juftified)  to  believe  in  him  as  God  and  man,  the  Redeem- 
er, Teacher,  Prieft  and  Lord.  But  the  Antecedent  is  moft  cer- 
tain :  therefore  fo  is  the  Con.equent. 

The  reafon  of  the  ConfequencCjis,  becaufe  the  ad  here  Is  fpe- 
cificd  from  its  Objcd.  All  this  is  palt  further  queftion. 

AH  the  Queftion  therefore  is  Whether  Scripture  do  any  where 
expound  it  fcif,  by  excluding  the  other  cfTentiai  parts  of  faith, 
from  being  thofe  ads  by  which  wc  are  juftified  ?  and  have  li.r.ic- 
ed  our  Juftiiication  to  any  one  ad?  This  lyeth  on  the  Affir- 
mers  to  prove.  So  that  you  rauft  note,  that  it  is  enough  for  me 
to  prove  that  we  are  ju^iticd  by  faith  in  Chrift  Jefus  :  for  this 
Indudeth  all  the  cflcntial  ads ;  till  chey  fhail  prove  on  the  con- 
trary, that  it  is  bar  fecmdum  tfnid^  and  that  God  hath  excluded 
all  other  effential  ads  of  faith  fave  that  which  they  affert ;  1  he 
prooftherefore  is  on  their  part,  and  not  on  mtne.And  I  fliall  try 
anon  how  well  they  prove  ir. 

In  the  mean  time,  let  us  fee  what  way  the  Scripture  goeth,and 
obferve  that  every  Text  by  way  of  Authority^  doth  afford  us  a 
fcveral  Argument,  unlcfs  they  prove  the  exclufion. 

Firft ,  LMarl^  16.15,16,17.  [^Go  ye  into  ali  the  vorld  aytd 
preach  the  Gofpsl  to  ever)  Creature  :  he  that  hetieveth  and  is  ^^»- 
tiiLed  pjull he  f'ived '^  andhethtt  believeth  not  fhttll  he  damned ', 
and  thefe  ftgns  [hall  fo^otr  them  that  hi/ievf^&cc  ]]  Here  the  faith 
mentioned,is  the  believing  of  the  Gofpi I ,  and  the  fame  with 
our  becoming  Chriftians  :  and  therefore  pot  confined  to  one 
part  or  ad  of  faving  faith. That  Gofpel  "vhich  muft  be  preached 
to  all  the  world,  is  It  that  is  received  b)  the  ''aith  here  mention - 
ed  ;  But  that  Gofpel  doth  encntially  contaaj  mo<e  th^n  the  do- 
drine  of  Chrifts  Priefthood   therefore  fo  do  h  that  faith. 

Obj\ct,  /;«  not  J  MJitfi  cation  ht*t  ^alvatton  that  u  there  pre- 
mtfed. 

nj^nfui.  It  is  that  Si'vAtion  whereof  Juftification  is  a  part  ; 
ItisfuchaS'lvationasall  h^vc  right  to  a«  K»on  4*>ever  they  be- 
lieve and  are  bapnzfd,  which  comprchendcth  Juftification  :  And 
the  Scripture  here  and  everywhere  doth  make  the  f^me  fa-th 
without  the  jcfaiidiltir.ction.to  be  thecM.ul  r^»u  vf  Juftiftcaiion 
and  of  our  litlc  cu  Glonf.cation  :  and  never  parcels  out  the 

feverai 


06-) 


feveral  effects  to  feveral  acts  of  faith  ;  except  only  in  thofc 
Qjalities  or  Aces  of  the  foul  w.hich  faith  is  to  produce  as  an 
efficient  caufe.  To  be  juftified  by  faith  or  Grace  ,  and  to  be  (i- 
vcd  by  faich  or  Grace,  are  promifcuoufly  fpokcn  as  of  the  firae 
faith  cr  Grace. 

Secondly,  ?'h>:  3.15.16,18.  He  that  believetloin  ki-n  /h'll 
net  ftrtfht  but  h.ive  eve)  /.<  t^g;  /*/<'0  ^^^  ^^  -^  helitveth  on  him  is 
ttct  coKdetrned.'^  Not  tobecondtmncdt  is  to  he  jufiifi.d.  Con- 
demnarion  and  Juftvfication  are  oppofed  in  Scripture,  f^om.  8. 
5  ^  ^  4,  Here  therefore  a  fwuing  faith  and  a  jt^fltj-ivg  are  made 
all  one.  And  itis[^  ^t/ifi/^/ <«  Chrif}]  without  exclufion  of 
any  eHtncial  part,  ihat  is  this  faith  ;  It  is  ^Believing  ii  the  Name 
cf  the  only  begnten  SonofGo'i.]  ver.18.  whichis  more  then  to 
believe  his  Ranfom. 

Thirdly,  /<?/?«  3.35,36.  The  "Father  lovtth  the  Son ^  and  hath 

given  all  things  into  hii  hand  »  he  th^t  believe:  h  on  the  Sen ,    hath 

everla[ling  life:  and  he  that  believeth  r.ot  the  fon,Pjall  not  fee  life> 

but  the  wrathofGod abideth  on  h'-m.'\  To  have  Gods  wrath  abide 

on  him  is  to  be  ununified.  And  the  unbelievers  oppofed  toihe 

Believers  tefore  mentioned,  are  fuch  as  [  Bd.eve  not  the  fan : '] 

which  phrafe  cannot  poffibly  be  limited  to  the  affiance  in  his 

blood:  It  is  the  [o«'^«9&i'  |  often  tranflated  D//fl^f(i<>«r :  figni- 

fying,faith  fVillet^  both  unbelieving  and  difobcdienf,  but  rather 

Difbedie^ty  properly  it  is  urf-:rfvadable.  But  of  this  more  anon. 

And  the  faith  here  mentioned  is  [Believing  on  the  fon~\  entirely, 

without  exclufion  of  any  efTential  acts ;   nay  exprefly  including 

the  act  in  qucfticn ,  by  fhewing  that  it  is  faith  in  Chrift  as  Lord, 

into   [  whofe  hards  the  Father  hath  given  all  things  ]   as  the 

connexion  of  thcfe  words  to  the  foregoing  doth  manifeft. 

Fourthly,  /fc/w.I.16,17,18.  lamnota/hamedoftheGofpehf 
Chrifii  for  it  u  the  power  cfGod  to  falvation  to  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth  -for  therein  is  the  Righteoufnefs  of  Qod  revealed  from 

faith  to  faith^  as  it  is  ^ritten^  the  jufi  [hall  hve  by  faith,']  where 
favingandjuftifying  faith  is  made  the  fame,  and  that  is  to  be  a 
believer  of  the  Gofpel,  or  in  Chrift,  without  limitation  to  any 
one  efTential  part  of  it. 

Fifthly,  Rom. 'i. 22.  ^  Even  the  Righteoufnefs  of  God,  Vchlch  ii 
hyf^'thofjefhs  (^hrift^Hnto  all^andttpon  all  them  that  beLeve.~^ 

Here 


Here  it  is  faith  in  Jefus  Chrift  by  which  we  are  juftificd  i   which 
therefore  includeth  ail  that  iselfential  to  it. 

Object,    Verf.  25.   It  is  [Aid  to  he  bj  fa  th  in  his  blood. 

Anfiv,  1 .  15uc  there  is  not  a  fyliabie  confining  it  to  faith  in  his 
blood  <^lofje.  It  faith  not,  (  bj  faith  only  in  his  bhoi  )  Secondly, 
The  ordinary  courfe  of  Scripture  is  to  call  it  by  that  name  (faith 
inJeffiiClorifl  )  which  comprehcndeth  all  thats  effential  to  it» 
But  fometime  upon  fpecialoccafions ,  its  denominated  from 
fome  one  notable  act  or  part,  And  that  is,  when  it  is  the  fcope 
of  tlie  text,  to  denote  more  the  diftinct  Intcreft  ot  that  part  of 
Chrifts  Office  which  is  related  to  that  act  of  faith,  then  any  folc 
Intcreft  of  that  act  of  faith  it  felf.  And  fo  the  Apoftle  here 
mentioneth  faith  in  his  blood  as  a  fpecial  act ,  becaufe  he  now 
draweth  them  efpccially  to  obferve  that  blood  which  is  the  Ob- 
ject of  it^j  and  in  other  places  he  inftanceth  in  other  acts  of  faith; 
bur  commonly  fpeaks'6f  it  entirely.  And  I  think  the  Opponents 
will  ^rant  that-  as  (  otily  )  is  not  here  expreffcd  ,  fo  neither  is  it 
implyed  :  for  then  «t  would  exclude  alfo,  faith  in  the  reft  of  his 
fatisfactory  Humiliation,  or  at  leaft,  in  his  active  Righteoufnefs, 
if  not  in  his  Pcrfon  or  Relation  :  of  which  more  anon. 

So  verf  1^.7,0,^1 .  Us caWcd  (  faith  )  entirely,  or  withovk  re- 
ftriction  by  which  we  arejullifiedj  and  therefore  none  of  the 
effentials  are  excluded.  '  ;  -    '" 

But  it  woul  j  be  too  tedious  to  recite  the  particular  Texts :  Its 
known  that  [^  by  faith  ]  and  \_  by  believing  ]  in  Chrift,  without: 
cxclufion  or  limitation,  is  the  common  phrafe  of  Scripture,when 
it  fpcaks  how  we  are  juftified  :  as  may  further  be  feen,  Rom.^.i, 
2.  &  9.32.  Gal.  2.T6.  (  Wearejttfiifiedby  the  faith  ofjeftu  Chrifl^ 
and  by  believing  in  Jefus  Chrift,  as  oppofcd  to  the  works  of  the 
Law;  butnotbyfaithinhisPficfthoodjOr  RdnG3m,asoppofed 
to  faith  in  him  as  our  Lord  and  Teacher  j  C?^*/.^.!  1,24,25,26.  & 
5.5  6.  Eph  3.8,9.  &  3.12,17.  Phil.  3.  9.  Ron).  9.  lo.Heb.  11. 
throughout,  f}hn6  35,4047.  ^^j  10.42,4^.  Rom. 10  10.  Acis 
13.39.  From  thele  and  m«ny  the  like  I  argue  thus. 

The  Scripture  doth  afcribe  our  Jufiification  tofaith  ;  and  doth 
not  limit  it  to  any  one  part  of  faith, excluding  thereft  :  Believing 
in  Jefus  Ctirii}  as  Redeemer,  Prophet,  Pricft  and  KingjiselTenti- 
allythisfaith.  ^^/<7&c. 

D  l( 


(i8) 


If  the  Scripture  fpeaks  of  faith  eflenually,  not  limiting  it  ad 
partem  fidei,ihzn  fo  muft  we  :  But  the  Scripture  doth  fo  .  E^;go  * 
&c.  It  is  nowhere  njore  neceffary  then  in  fuch  cafes  this  to 
hold  to  the  Rule,  of  not  diftinguiftiing  «^;  Uxnondifiinghit. 
Firft,  I'ccaufc  itisan  <i£^<^»«_g  to  the  <r'o^r/«^  of  Chrift  in  a  point 
of  weight.  Secondly,Becaufc  it  favourethofa  prefumptuous</*- 
traSlhn  from  the  Condition  Impofed  by  Chritt  h/mfelf.  If  a 
Prince  do  make  a  General  ad  of  Oblivion,  pardoning  all  Rebels 
that  will  enter  into  Covenam  with  him,  wherein  they  confent  to 
Accept  his  pardon,  and  take  him  for  their  Soveraign  Lord  ;  He 
that  fhall  now  fay,  that  Returning  to  his  Allegiance,  or  confent- 
ing  to  the  Princes  Sovcraignty,  is  no  part  of  the  Condition  of 
the  Traytors  pardon,buc  that  they  arc  pardoned  only  by  accept- 
ing of  a  pardon,  and  not  by  the  other  ad,  will  certainly  be  guil- 
ty of  adding  to  the  act  of  his  Prince,  and  of  detracting  from  the 
condition  by  him  required;  and  fo  is  it  in  our  prefent  cafe. 

If  Godfpeakof  any  thing  eflentially,  we  muft  not  prefumq 
without  fufiicient  proof  of  thereftriction,  to  expound  it  only  di 
parte  e^tntiaU.  if  he  invite  a  Gueft  to  his  marriage  feaft ,  he 
me  ans  not  the  mans  hcAd  only,or  his  htart  only  :  for  neither  of 
thefcistheman.  If  he  require  a  lamb  in  facrifice,  we  muft 
not  expound  it  of  the /[;f<i<!J  only,  or  heart  on\y  of  a  Lamb. 

To  this  Argument  (briefly  in  my  Apology  )  Mr.  'BUk.e 
(  having  firft  excepted  at  the  newnefs  of  the  phrafe  Q  Lord-Re- 
deemer ]  doth  anfwer  thus  [_  I  fay^  Chriji  is  to  he  received  as  the 
Lord  our  Redeemer,  and  as  our  (JMajler  or  Teacher  ;  bnt  faith 
iff  Jtiftification  eyes  Redemptiott ^  not  dominion.  "^  Rcpl.  Firft, 
The  Phrafe  [  Faith  in  fafiijieation  ]  is  as  unacceptable  to  me, 
i%£  Lord-Red:eemer~j  is  to  you:not  only  for  the  Novelty,  but  the 
ambiguity ,  if  not  the  falfc  Dodrine  which  it  doth  import. 
Firft,  If  the  meaning  be  [  Faith  as  it  is  the  CoriditioH  of  our 
fafitfication,  ]  then  its  contrary  to  your  own  Conccffion  after, 
that  this  (hould  eye  Chrifts  Prieft-hood  only  ;  and  its  an  un- 
truth, which  you  utterly  fail  in  the  proof,  or  do  nothing  to  it. 
Secondly,  If  vou  mean[|  F(,ith  in  its  eff'eSIing  c/"  <?»r  ^/*y?//f- 
f^friow,  j  then  it  importfth  another  miftake,  which  you  have  not 
proved,  VIZ.  that  faith  doth  cffcd  our  Juftificaiion.  if 
you  mean [ /4fV/??  in  Rfceiving  Juflifieation^^i^^^^  you  mean 

the 


(19) 

the  ^r<);j*r  Pafllve  Receiving,  and  this  is  but  7«/?»/i<:4^»,  and  the 
mariReceivethic  as  theSubjed,  and  his  faith  is  but  a  Conditi- 
on, or  means  of  it :  Or  you  mean  the  Moral  aCiive  'JlfetAph- 
tied  Receiving '^  which  is  nothing  but  Confentir.g  that  It  (hall 
be  ours;  or  accepting:  And  this  is  neither  part  of  Juftificati- 
on,  nor  proper  Caufe  ;  but  a  Condition,  and  but  part  of  the 
Condition:  And  therefore  here  your  meaning  rauftbeoneof 
thcfe  two,  Either  That  AB  of  Faith nhichtstke  acctftingof 
Ju(it^catto»^  is  not  the  eying  ofDomnion  :  To  which  I  reply, 
Firft,  taking  it  largely  as  a  moral  Afl,  its  not  true;  for  its 
comprehcnfive  of  both,  of  which  more  anon:  but  taking  it 
ftridly  as  one  PhyficalAct,  its  true :  Secondly,  But  then  its 
nothing  to  the  purpofe  :  For  we  are  not  more  truly  juftifyed 
by  that  Act  which  is  the  accepting  of  Juftification,  or  Confent- 
ing  to  be  judified.  then  we  are  by  the  Accepting  of  Chrift 
for  our  Lord  and  Mafter ;  the  reafon  of  which,  you  have  had 
before,  and  (hall have  more  fully  anon;  orelfe  you  mean 
as  before  ex  preffed,  That  ASi  of  Faith^'hich  is  our  (^onfenting 
to  fhfiificationy  is  the  whole  CoveiUion  of  our  fu(iific>itiot7,  and 
not  the  lytng  of  Dominion  ;  But  of  that  before.  If  I  may  Judge 
by  your  Doctrine  elfewhere  expre(fed,  you  mean  only  That  thi 
ah  of  Faith  vrhich  accepteth  of  fajiif  cation^  is  the  only  Infinf- 
ment  of  fuftification  ;of  which  in  its  due  place:  It  may  here  fuffice 
to  fay  again,  that  I  affirm  not  that  in  queition  to  the  be  Inftru- 
ment  of  it.Be  not  offended  that  1  enquire  into  the  fenfe  of  youf 
ambiguous  phrafe,  whxh  I  truly  profeff,  is  to  me  not  intelligi- 
ble, till  you  have  expUined  in  what  fenfe  it  is  that  you  intend  it ; 
and  therefore  my  enquiry  is  not  n^edlefs. 

^r.  3.  If  the  Scripture  doth  (  not  only  by  the  fpecificke  Dcno- 
nination,  as  was  laft  proved,  but  alfo  )  by  defcription,  and  men- 
tioning ihofc  very  acts,  include  the  believing  in  Chrift  as  our 
Lord  and  Teacher,  &c,  inthatfaithby  which  as  a  Condition, 
we  are  juftifiedj  then  we  are  ju(Vified  by  believing  in  Chrift  as 
our  Lord  and  Teacher,  &c.  not  only  as  a  facrifice  or  Meritcr 
of  Juftification.  But  the  Antetedent  is  true :  therefore  fo  is  the 
Confequent. 

I  prove  the  Antecedent  by  many  Texts. 

Rom,  10  4,^,78,9,10.    Fo'^  Chrifi  is  the  end  of  the  Laxp 

D  2  /or 


Czo) 


for  Righteotifntfs  to  eVfyote  that  htUiveth.  "^  But  tht 

R'ghteottfn^s  \'vh:chii  off^ith  fpfaksth  on  this  wife  '   Snynotin 
thj  heart,  trho  fljill  --'fcend  into  He.tven  ?   that  is  to  biing  Chriji 
fiiovfn  from '^bove  :   or -who  pjalldsfcend  into  the  deep?  that  is  to 
bring  ftp  Ck  iji  agam  from  the  dead  :  Bat  ^hat  f^ith  it  ?  The  word 
is  nigh  thee,  even  in  thj  month,  andtn  thy  heart,  that  is  the  rpord 
of  faith  which  we  preachy  that  if  Ujoh  Jl^alt  confefs  with  thy  month 
the  L'^rd  Jefust  and  fl>alt  believe  in  thy  heart  th.tt  CJod  raifed  him 
from  the  dea^y  thou  pialt  be  faved ;  for  ^ith  the  heart  r»<n  belie- 
veth  unto  Righteoufnefs^and  with  the  mouth  confejfion  is  made  unto 
Salvation.^    Here  it  is  evident,  thititis  sl  IB elieving  unto  Righ' 
rfow/wf/r  that  is  mentioned,  and  therefore  it  is  the  Believing  by 
which  we  ^re  juftified.  And  then  it  is  evident  that  the  faith  here 
cdi\kd'i  a  believing  unto  Righteoufneft  ]   is  the  believing  in  the 
Lor^  Jejuj  ;  exprcfly  Chrift  as  Lord  and  Saviour, is  made  the 
Objed  of  it ;  and  is  not  confined  to  a  believing  in  one  part  of 
his  Priefthood  only.  Alfo  [_that  Qodraifed  Chriftfroir.  the  head] 
is  the  expreffed  objedof  this  faith.     And  theR  furrcdion  of 
Chrift  is  no  part  of  his  facrifice  or  meer  Prieftly  Office. 

^o«7.4.24,2  5    Q  But  for  tu  alfo^  to  ^hom  it  jfhaUbe  imputed^  if 
we  believe  on  him  that  raifed  up  fefus  our  Lord  from  the  dead  ~\  . 
Here  it  is  evident  that  it  is  Juftification  it  felf  that  is  the  Benefit 
(■pokenoi^^cvGnthe  imputing  of  Righteoufnefs  :  And  that  faith 
here  is  mentioned  as  the  Condition  of rW  Jmputationr//tt'«^«- 
lieve]  And  that  this  faith  is  dcfcribed  to  be  firft  a  believing  in 
him  that  raifeci  Chrift ^  and  not  only  iiCh »/?.    Secondly,  A  be- 
lieving in  Chriji  fe/tu  our  Lord^  who  is  ihe  exprefs  objed  of  it ; 
and  fo  his  Lordlliip  taken  in  ;  and  thirdly,  a  believing  in  his  Rc" 
furre^liony  and  not  only  in  his  blood  or  obedience,    bo  that  I  fee 
no  room  left  to  encourage  any  doubting^  whether  we  are  juftifi- 
cdby  believing  in  <  hnft  as  Lord,andinhisRefurrc(J^ion,  and  in 
God  that  raifed  him ,  as  the  Condition  of  our  J  uftification. 
fohn  1.9,1 1 ,1  2.  £  Th^t  was  the  true  light  that  Itfhteth  every 

man  thjL-  comti  h  into  the  world. fJe  came  to  hn  ow*7y>.nd  his 

own  received  kum  not '.  But  as  r»a»y  as  received  k  im,  to  ihem  gave 
he  poVcer  to  become  the  font  of  Qod  ^  to  them  th.it  ^eliive  tn  hU 
N'ame.~\  Here  it  is  manifeft,  Firft,  that  it  is  the  faith  by  whicll^ 
we  are  julufied  tii.u  \y  fpokenof;    for  its  coraaionl-y  agreed 

that 


(ZI) 


thatjuftificationis  here  included  in  Adoption,  or  at  ieaft  thaf 
its  the  rims  a6l  of  faith  by  which  we  are  adopted  and  juftified. 
Secondly,  Alfo  that  the  objed  of  this  faith  is  Chnft  as  the 
Z/z^^f,  which  is  not  his  mcer  Priefthood.  Thirdly,  And  that  ids 
his  perfon  in  his  full  office,  and  not  fome  fingle  benefit.  Fourth- 
ly, that  it  is  called  [_  hts  l^me  •  J  and  [^  "Believ'ni  in  hii  NAmt\ 
is  more  then  confenting  to  be  juftified  by  his  blood  ;  and  in  Scri- 
pture-fenfe  comprehendeth  his  Nature  and  Office  :  and  is  all  one 
as  taking  him  as  the  true  Meiliah,  and  becoming  his  Difciples. 
Fifthly,  And  its  much  to  be  Noted,  that  it  is  not  by  way  of  Phy- 
fical  efficacy  by  apprehenfion  f  as  I  take  Gold  in  my  hand,  and 
Jfo  receive  poffellion  of  it  )  that  faith  hath  its  ncareft  Intereft 
in  our  Adoption:  but  it  qualifieth  the  fubjcct  difpoficively  in 
the  fight  of  God,  and  fo  God  gives  men  Po'^er  thereupon  to 
•become  hisfons. 

Sotheforecited  words, /<?A/»3.?i,55,3  5..  Where  Zi/i  is  gi- 
ven on  Condition  that  we  believe  on  the  Son  ;  and  that  is  expref- 
fed  as  the  object  of  that  faith,  as  he  is  one  that  [  Cometh  from 
Heaven^anci  14  ahove  a'l^  and  rvhom  the  Father  ioveth  ,  aidhath 
gtven  a!1  th'ngi  iKto  his  hjtnJs.  i 

And  hlohn  5. 22. 2?, 24.  [^  He  bath  committed  aUjudgfrnent 
to  the  fen-,  that  a  I  men  fljouU  honour  the  Son^  even  as  thsy  honor 
the  Father ;  Vinlj^  vfrily^  I  fay  unto  you,  he  th/tt  heareth  try 
X^ord^  and  believelh  on  him  that  ftni  me^  kath  everlafitr,g_  life-,  and 
JhaS  not  come  into  Condemnation  ]  Here  the  faith  mentioned  is 
that  which  freech  men  from  Cmhrnnation,  and  therefore  is  ic 
by  which  we  are  ^ufiifed:  And  the  object  of  it  is  the  iVord  of 
Chrift  (  and  therefoic  not  only  his  Priefthood  )  and  the  Father 
as  fendngthe  Sun,  even  to  his  whole  office  of  Rcdemp.'ion. 

Moreover,  that  fatth  by  which  our  Juftific^tion  'S  continued, 
it  is  bi?gun  by  this  (both  they  ai;d  we  are  agreed  in  ,  though 
fome  yield  not  that  any  thing  more  is  required  to  itscontiiiU- 
ancc.;  But  the  fa  th  by  which  Juftification  is  continued,  is  the  * 
'Seiief  of  the  Gf  fatly  sK^hfht^  p  f  ached  to  every  Cr  e. -it  Hr  e  ^ud  not 
only  one  br  nchof  ic.  Co/.i. 2 1,2^,13.  And  it  isca!led,Cu/.2.6. 
Z  Receiving  Chr'p  IjJHi  the  Lord. 

John  20. 3  I .  Thi'-e  thiagt  are  "^r'tten^  thxt  ye  might  fielieve 
ihiit  hfu  is  the  Ch'-iJ},  the  fort  of  God  a  id  that  bdievntg  ji  millet 

D  i  have 


(zO 


h^ve  life  through  h:i  Na'ne :  '\  That  faith  by  which  we  have  life, 
is  certainly  it  by  which  weare  juftified  :  for  as  juftification  is 
pare  of  that  lite,  fo  Right  to  Eternal  life  is  given  on  the  fame 
terms  as  Jullificationis.  And  the  object  of  this  faith  here  is, 
Chriftin  Pcrfon  and  endre  Odicc  ,  thefon  of  God  by  whofe 
Name  we  have  life. 

^(3/  2.30  31,3  a,n,^4j3S  3^,?7.38.  C  A'«oVb/»^  that  god 
hid  frtorr.  '^iih  an  Oath  to  kim,  th^t  of  the  fruit  of  hu  lojnti  ac» 
cord-rg  to  thejlepj,  he  wotildraife  t4p  (fhrtfi^  to  fit  ufonhis  Throne, 
he  feting  th^  before  fp^k^  of  the  Refurre^ton  of  Chrifiythat  hu/oul 
"^as  not  left  in  kis  Hel/^  ntither  his fiefij  did  fee  Corruption  :  ThU 
Jefa:  h-.tbGodraifedupy  thereof  ttv  dre  all  Tritnejftj;  therefore 

being  by  the  right  hand  of  God  exalted  —^ therefore  let  all 

thehoufeof  Jfrael  k»o^  ajfttredly  tlat  Qod  hath  made  this  fame 
Jefus  ^hom  je  htive  Cructfed^both  Lord  and  Chrifi.     No^  vhtn 

thej  heard  this Then  Pejer  faid  unto  them.  Repent  and  be 

bapttKed  every  one  of  yon  in  the  Name  of  lejtu  Chrifi  ,  far  the 

Ktmiffion  of  fini .]     Here  it  is  evident  that  RemifTion  of 

fins  is  a  Benefit  that  by  this  faith  they  were  to  be  made  par- 
takers of  j  and  fo  that  it  is  the  faith  by  ivhichwe  are  )u(tified,that 
they  are  1  nvited  to  :  And  that  the  Object  of  this  faith  impljed 
intheterms^  Repent  and  be  haptized,  &c.  is  the  Name  of  Jcfus 
Chrift,  and  that  eminently  in  his  exaltation,  as  Rifen,  and  f<t  at 
the  Right  hand  of  God,  and  as  Lord  and  Chri/f. 

So  A^s  3.19.  22.15.  Rtpent  therefore  and  be  Converted^  that 

your  fins  may  be  blotted  out For  Mofes  truly  faid,  A  Prophet 

fhall  the  Lord  jour  God  ralfe  up • .]     Here  the  Jews  are  ac- 

cufcd  for  killing  the  Prince  of  life,t'fr/!i5.  and  exhorted  co  Re- 
pent thereof,  and  fo of  their  Infidelitv,  and  be  converted  (to 
Chrift,  and  fo  to  become  Chriftitns, )  which  is  more  then  one 
act  of  faith  j  and  this  was  that  their  fins  may  be  blotted  out : 
And  Chrift  as  Prophet  is  propounded  to  them  as  the  object  of 
this  faith,  which :  hey  are  exhorted  to. 

So  A6l,\o  42,43.  with  35.37,38,40,4i.[| /^«<^krtfwi»4«<^ 
edui  to  p  each  unto  the  people^  and  to  tefiifie  that  it  is  he  that  ii 
ordained  ef  g«d  to  h  the  fudge  of  ejiuick,  Muddead  -^  to  him  give 
all  the  Trjphets  vitnefs^  that  through  his  name^  ^hofoever  be- 
leveth  in  him  fhall  receive  Remijfntt  of  fins,  ]    Here  the  faith  is 

defcribed 


C^3) 

defcribed  which  hath  the  Promife  of  Remiffien.  And  the 
Objed  of  it  is  at  large  fet  out  to  be  Ji^m  Chnfi  m  Lod  »f  all, 
ver.  36.  04  anointed  Kvith  the  Ho!j  Ghcft  a>id  X^ith  pover,  ruifed 
from  the  deifi^  and  wade  the  Judge  of  ths  quick  and  the  dead  •  and 
it  is  called  entirely  a  Bdisving  in  him,  and  the  Remiflion  is 
through  his  name. 

9^cl.  16. 3 1.  1  he  faith  of  the  Jaylor  as  pcrfwaded  to  for  life.' 
is  the  helievingin  the  Lori  J  ff*t  Chriji  entirely  :  and  itt called 
a  Beli  ving  in  God^  ver.  3  4. 

I  Tet.z.  4,5,6,7.  The  faith  there  mentioned  is  that  By  which 
we  arc  juftlfied ;  he  that  btlifveth on  himfhtllnot  be  co-founded • 
and  the  Objcd  of  it  is^rvhole  Chriji  as  the  Corner  ftone,Ele^  and 
FrecioHs.'^ 

fohn^.  10,  II,  12.  [Thcfaith  there  mentioned,  is  that  by 
wthich  wc  have  Chrij}  and  Life \:  And'the  Ohji€toi  it  is,  { the 
Son  fif  god  ]  and  [_  Qod  ]  and  [  the  record  that  God  gave 
of  ha  Son  ]  even  [^  that  god  hath  given  uj  etern^tl  Life,  and  thii 
life  is  in  ha  Son.  ] 

iMat.  1 1.  27,28,29.  The  faith  there  mentioned,  is  called 
[_  a  comming  to  (,'hrifi  weary  and  heavy  laden  ,  thai  he  may  give 
them  reft  3  which  muft  comprehend  Reft  from  the  Guilt  of 
fin  and  puniftiment.  And  the  Aft  of  that  Faith  is  direded 
toChriftas  one  to  whom<?//  Fo^em  given  by  the  father,  and 
as  one  whofe  yoak  and  burden  we  muft  take  upon  us.  But  I  (hall 
add  no  more  for  this. 

To  thffe  laft  Mr,  EUke  faith,  }Ag.  564.  This  Text  Jhexvs  the 
*Duty  of  men  to  be,  net  alone  tofek,  '^eji  and  eafe  from  Ch>  ifl^  but 
to  learn  of  Chnfl  and  follow  him  :  But  neither  their  leaminq  nor 
their  imitation,  but  faith  in  his  blood,  td  their  freedom  or  f;ifiifi. 
cation.  Repl.  Properly  neither  one  ad  of  faith  nor  odier  is 
ourjuftification.  Faith  is  a  j^rfAr/ in  the  Habit,  and  an  ad 
in  the  exercffe:  and  Juftificat'onis  3i  Relation.  Faith  is  a  part 
of  our  Vandification  •  T  herefoie  it  is  not  our  Juftification.  But 
fuppofing  you  fpeak  Mctonymically,  I  fay  both  ads  of  faith 
arc  our  Jultification,  that  is,  the  Condition  ofit.  And  the  Text 
proves  it,  by  making  our  Subjedion  not  only  a  Duty,  but 
an  exprei5  Condition  of  the  Promife.  And  this  Conditi- 
onaliry  you  here  before  and  after  do  confefs  or  grant. 

j^rgument 


(h:> 


Argument  4  ]f  we  are  juftified  by  Chrift  as  Prieft,  Pro- 
phet and  K  n^  conjundly,  and  not  by  any  of  thefc  alons^much 
l^fs  by  his  Humiliation  and  Obedience  alone  ;  then  according 
to  the  Opponents  own  Principles  (  who  argue  from  the  dift  n(ft 
Intereltof  the  fcvcial  parts  of  the  Objed,  to  the  diftinft  In- 
tereft  of  the  fcveril  acts  of  faith  )  wearejuftihed  by  believing 
in  Chnft  as  Pnelt,  Prophet  and  King  ,  and  not  as  Humble 
and  Obedient  only.  But  we  arejuftifiedby  Chrift  as  Prieft, 
Prophet  and  King,  &c.    Erp^  dec 

Ihe  Confequence  is  their  own.  And  the  Antecedent  I  (hall 
prove  from  feveral  texts  of  Scripture,  and  from  the  nature  of 
the  thing,  beginning  with  the  laft. 

And  nrft  it  is  to  be  fuppofed,  That  we  are  all  agreed  that  the 
blood  and  Humiliation  of  Jefus  Chrift,  are  the  Ranfome  and 
Price  that  fatisfieththc  jufticeof  God  for  our  fins,  and  accor- 
dingly rauft  be  apprehended  by  the  Believer:  And  many  of  us 
agree  alfo,  that  his  Aftive  obedience  as  fuch,  is  part  of  this  fa- 
tisfaction,  or  at  leaft,  Meritorious  of  the  fame  effect  of  our 
Juftification.  But  the  thing  that  I  am  to  prove,is,  that  the  Me- 
ritorious Caufe  is  not  the  only  Caufe  and  that  Chrift  in  his  other 
actions  is  as  truly  the  efficient  Caufe,as  in  his  meriting,  and  that 
all  do  fwectly  and  harmonioufly  concur  to  the  entire  effect ;  and 
that  faith  muft  haverefpect  to  the  other  caufcs  of  our  Juftifi* 
cation,  and  not  alone  to  the  M  eritorious  Caufe,  and  that  we  arc 
Juftified  by  this  entire  work  of  Paith.andnot  only  by  that  Act 
which  refpects  the  fatisfaction  or  merit.  And  firft,  I  (hall  prove 
that  thrift  doth  actually  juftifie  us  as  King. 
The  word  jHji'ficatio»^  as  I  have  often  faid  C  and  its  paft  doubt) 
is ufed  to  fignifie  thefe  three  Acts.  Firft,  Condonation, or  con- 
ftitutive  Juftification,  by  the  Law  of  Grace  or  Promife  of  the 
GofpeJ.  Secondly  ,  Abfolution  by  fentence  in  Judgement, 
Thirdly,  The  Execution  of  the  former,  by  actuall  Liberation 
from  penalty.  The  laft  is  oftener  call'd  Remiflion  of  fin  •  the 
two  former  arc  more  properly  called  Juftification. 

Firft,  As  for  the  firft  of  thefe,  i  argue  this:  If  Chrift  do  as 
King  and  Benefactor, (on  fuppofition  of  his  antecedent  Merits,) 
Enact  the  Law  of  Grace  or  promife  by  which  we  ?re  juftified  , 
f  hen  doth  he  aj  King  and  Benefactor  juftificus  by  Condonati- 
on. 


(iT) 


on ,  or  conftitotion.  For  the  Promife  is  his  Inftrnment  by  which 
he  doth  ir.  But' the  Antecedent  is  certain,  therefore  fois  the 
Confequent. 

As  the  Father  by  Right  of  Creation  was  Rector  of  the  new 
created  worU,  and  fo  made  the  C  ovcnant  o/Lifc  that  was  then 
made  :  fo  the  Son  (  and  the  Father)  by  Right  of  Redemption 
is  Rector  of  the  new  Redeemed  world,  ana  lo  made  the  Law  of 
Grace,  that  gives  Chnft  and  Life  to  all  that  will  believe.  As 
it  is  a  Law ,  it  is  the  Act  of  a  King  :  As  it  is  a  Deed  of  Gift, 
it  is  the  Act  of  a  Benefactor  t  as  it  is  founded  in  his  deach.and 
fuppofeth  his  fatisfadion,thereby  it  is  called  his  Teftamerc.  In 
norefpect  is;t  part  of  his  fitisfaclion  or  HuTjiiliation  orMeric 
itf  lf,bui  the  trueeffe^  of  it. So  that  Chriftsmerit  is  the  Remote 
Moral  Caufc  of  our  Jaftification,  but  his  granting  of  this  pro- 
mife or  Aft  of  Grace ,  is  the  true  natural  efficient  Inftru- 
raental  Caufe  of  our  Juftificatlon  ,  evej?  the  Immediate 
Caufe.  '^*^    J  '   ; 

Secondly,  Juflification  by  fcntcnce  of  Judgcr^eric'  is  unde- 
niably by  Chrift  as  "King.  For  God  hath  appointed  to  Judge  the 
World  by  him,  A61. 17. 31.'  and  hath  committed  all  Judge- 
ment to  h'\m  John  5.  22.  And  therefore  as  Judge  he  doth  juftifie 
and  Condemn.  This  is  not  therefore  any  part  of  his  Humilia- 
tion or  Obedience  ,  by  which  he  ranfomeihfinners  from  the 
Curfe.  To  deny  thefe  things ,  is  to  deny  Principles  in  Politicks. 
-  Thirdly,  And  then  for  the  Execution  of  the  fentence  by 
aftual  hberation,  there  is  as  little  room  for  a  doubt,  this  being 
after  both  the  former,  and  the  aft  of  a  Reftor,  and  not  of  a 
Surety  in  the  form  of  a  fervanr.  So  that  it  is  apparent,  that  as 
the  MeVit  of  our  Juf^t/Ication  is  by  Chrittin  his  Humiliation  -, 
So  our  aftual  Juftification  in  all  three  fcnfesis  by  Chrift  ts 
King. 

And  therefore  Faith  in  order  to  Juftification,  muil  according- 
lyrefpect  him. 

Secondly,As  the  Teacher  of  the  Church-Chrift  doihnot  imme- 
diately juftifie,  but  yet  mediately  he  dotbjand  it  is  but  mediately 
that  hejuftifieth  by  his  Merits  The  Gofpel  is  a  Law  that 
muft  be  promulgate  and  expounded,  and  a  Dodrinethatmuft 
be  taught  and  prelTcd  on  Tinners,  till  they  Kceivc  it  and  believe, 

E  .         that 


Ci<?) 


that  they  may  be  ja  lified :  And  this  Chrift  doth  as  the  Teacher 
of  his  Church.     And  Faith  muft  accordingly  refpect  him. 

Thirdh'jTheRefurrediOnof  Jefus  Chrirt  was  part  ofhis  ex- 
altation by  Power  andConqueft,  and  not  of  his  Humiliation; 
and  yet  we  are  pftified  by  his  Refurredion,  as  that  which  both 
(hewed  the  pcrfedion  ofhis  fatisfadion.  He  by  wh  ch  he  cntred 
upon  that  ftate  of  Glory.in  which  he  was  to  apply  the  benefits. 
Fourthly,  The  Interccffion  of  Chtift  is  a  part  of  his  office, 
as  he  is  a  Prieft  for  ever  after  the  order  of  (JHe/chi^edeck^:  but  it 
is  no  part  of  hiSvHumiliation  or  Ranfome.  And  yet  we  arc 
fuftified  by  his  Interceffion :  And  therefore  Faith  muft  rcfpct 
it  for  J  unification. 

Let  us  now  hear  what  The  Scripture  faith  inthefe  cafes, 
Mattthe^  p.  6.  []  'Bttt  that  yon  may  kfo^  thtit  the  Son  of  m»n 
hath  Fo^er  on  earth  to  forgive  jins^  die.  ]  Here  it  is  plainly 
Blade  an  Ad  ofPowerandnotof  Hurailiation,to  forgive  fins. 

Mat.  II.  27>i8, 19.  iy4U  things  are  delivered  unto  me  of 
my  Father^  %iQ.  C^^ne  to  me  allye  that  are  nvearj^  &c.  fo  Mat.- 
28.  18, 19.  compared  with /t/uri^i  6.  15,16.  (hew  that  itis 
an  ad  of  Chrift  exalted  or  in  Po;^r,  to  pardon  ,  or  grant  the 
promife  of  Grace* 

John  1 .  1 2 .  To  give  power  to  men  to  become  the  Sons  of  Qod^ 
muft  be  an  aU  of  T  oreer. 

John  5.22,25,24.  it  is  cxprefs  of  the  fentcnce. 

aA^s  5.31.  [_tiim  hath  God  exalted  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Savi- 
our^ for  to  give  Repentance  to  Ifraelattd  forgivenefs  of  fins.  ]  He 
forgiveth  as  a  Prince  and  Saviour. 

e^ff.  10.42.43.  he  is  preached  as  the  Jttdge  of  ^uick  and 
deadi  and  famadethe  Objedof  the  faith,  by  which  we  have 
Remiflion  of  fins. 

Ron9.^.2%.  [[  fVho  TV  at  delivered  for  our  offences^  andraifedfor 
our  lufiification.  1  And  this  RcfurredionCas  is  faid)was  part  ofhis 
Exaltation.  And  the  Apoft'le  thence  concludes  fas  is  aforefaid) 
that  this  is  the  faith  that  is  Imputed  to  us  for  Righteoufnefs  []// 
we  btlieve  in  him  that  raifed  up  fefw  our  Lord  from  the  dead.  ] 

Rom.Z.l%-)l^-X,f^ho  JhallU)  anything  to  the  charge  ofGsds 
JE/e^  ?  it  is^odibat  jujiifieth:  Vfhou  hethatcondemneth  ?  it  ia 

Chri^ 


C2^7) 


Chriff  that  died,  J*a  ratlnr  that  u  rifem  ^gain  ,  who  U  tven  at  tkt 
ti'ht  handofQod  ^  nh»  affo  m^keth  interce^on  fcrus.  ^  Here 
^oi/^  aod  the  RtfurreFltert^  and  Sejfton  at  Cjods  >  ight  hand  ,  and 
the  trite  cfjjionff  Ch*-'fi,  are  all  made  the  grounds  or  caufcs  of 
our  JuUificatron,  and  nor  only  Chnfts  death  ;  Yea,  itisejcpicft 
by  [^  tt  M  Chrift  that  dud^j/ea  rathtrthat  is  rtfin^SiC  J 

I  ^o>.i5.i,2  ;,4.  The  faith  by  which  F^u/ieWs  ihem  they 
were  fiived,  had  Chrifts  Relurreftion  for  its  objed,  as  well  as  his 
dying  for  our  fins. 

/'^'/.3.b\9,io.  P4«//wayof  Tuftification  was  firft  to  \_wi» 
Chnfi^  and  be  f.undm  h  m^  and  fo  to  have  a  Righteoufxeft  i)f 
Goa  bj  faith  in  Chriji  (  whole  Chritt,  )  and  not  that  of  the  LaVP  ; 
that  he  mght  kjowthe  pnivfrofhtt  RefMrreHtoK  dcc. 

The  true^4atureof  th  sfai:h  is  defcribed,  i  Pct.i.21.  [fVho 
hy  htm  do  believe  in  God  that  r*i' fed  kirn  from  the  dtad^  andgAvt 
htm  Glcrj^  that  your  Faith  and  Hope  may  be  in  God.'] 

I  Pet.^\i\.  [_  The  like  Figure  Vfhereunto  even  "Saptifm  f  doth 

tU>-t»  0lf«  fuve  m b)  the  RelurreEiion  of  fefpts  Chrifl ,  rifho  i4 

gone  Into  Hesvtn^  and  u  on  the  right  hand  of  God ;  Angels  and  Ah' 
thoritifs,  andTo^ers,  bti'^g  made  fttbjtEi  to  hm.]  It  is  certain 
that  the  falvation  of  ^apttfn  confiiicth  very  much  in  Remiflion 
of  finor  Juftification. 

In  a  word,  it  is  moft  evident  in  Scripture,  that  merit  and  fatif- 
fadion  are  but  the  moral,  remote  preparatory  Caufes  ofour  Ju- 
ftifica«on  ( though  exceeding  eminent ,  and  muft  be  the  daily 
ftudy,andeverlafting  praifcof  the  Saints  )  and  that  the  per- 
feding  nearer  efficient  caufes,  were  by  other  ads  of  Chrift ;  and 
that  all  concurred  to  accompiifli  this  worJr,  And  therefore 
even  tx  parte  '  hrtfti  ,  the  work  is  done  by  his  feveral  ads, 
though  merited  by  him  in  his  humiliation  only.  And  therefore 
it  s  paft  doubt  on  their  own  principles ,  that  faith  muft  refped 
«itf,in  order  to  our  Juftification.  And  the  faith  by  which  we  are 
juftified  muft  be  that  of  the  Eunuch,  AEls  8.37.  that  believed 
Xf  th  a'l  his  heart  th  t  Chriji  tt'/W  $hefon  of  God  ^  and  fo  received 
him  as  Chrift  entirely. 

Argurueni  5.  If  ir  be  a  necefTary  Condition  of  our  ^eing 
^jipttKtdfor  the  Remiffion  of  fin ,  that  wc  profefs  a  belief  in  more 
then  Chrifts  Humiliation  and  merits  then  is  it  a  necefTary  CondL- 

£  2  tion 


CiS) 


tton  of  our  aSu^l  Rtmijfitn  offm^  that  we  rully  IfeUeve  in  more 
than  Chrifts  Humiliation  and  Merits  :  But  the  Antecedent  is 
ccrtain.For  ihePrcfcript,A/'rf;.38.i9,2Q,and  thcconQantly  ufed 
form  of  Baptifaj ,  and  the  Tests  even  now  mentioned,  i  Tet.i, 
21.  y^£?.8.37.do  all  Qiew  it:  And  I  have  more  fully  proved  it  in 
my  Difpute  of  Right  to  Sacraments.  And  the  Confequence  is 
undeniable :  And  i  think  all  will  be  granted. 

^rgumtnt  6.  If  the  Apoftles  of  Chrift  thcmfelves  before  bit 
death,  were  juftified  by  believing  in  him  as  the  fon  of  GovJ,  an- 
the  Teacher  and  King  of  the  C  hurch,  fyea  perhaps  without  bed 
lieving  at  all  in  his  Death  and  Ranfom  thereby)  then  the  belie- 
ving in  him  as  the  Ton  of  God ,  and  Teacher  and  King ,  con* 
jund  with  believing  in  Ws  blood ,  are  the  faith  by  which  we  arc 
fiowjuftificd.  Bat  the  Antecedent  is  true  :  therefore  fo  is  the 
Confequent. 

The  reafon  of  the  Confequence  is,  becaafe  it  is  utterly  im- 
probable that  the  addition  of  further  light  and  objei^s  for  our 
faith,  (liould  null  the  former,  and  that  which  was  all  or  fo  much 
of  their  juftifying  faith,  (hould  be  now  no  part  of  ours. 

Tbe  Antecedent  I  prove,  CManh.i6,'l  i  .22,23 .  [  From  thdt 
timi  forth  hgan  fefus  to  fbetv  unto  hit  *J)ifciplit^  how  that  he 
mufi go  unto  Jerufahnt^  and  [uffer  many  things  of  the  Slders  mtd 
ehitfPrieJis  $»d  Scriht,  ttnd  bt  killedtand  hi  raijed  again  the  third 
day  ;  then  Peter  took,  him  and  began  to  rebuke  hmy  faying,    "Be  H 

far  from  thee  Lord^thii  fhali  not  be  unto  thee  ]  &c. ^John  1 1. 

1 5.  Thefe  things  undtrfioodr.ot  his  Difciples  at  the  firp  ;  but  when 
fefus  was  ghrified^  thfn^dcc.  Luke  28.  [ Then  he  tockunto  him 
the  twelve^  and  faid  unto  them ;  'Beheld ^  we  go  up  to  Jerufalem^ 
and  ali  things  that  are  "bitten  by  the  Prophets  concerning  the  fon 
of  man  ^  p3  all  (ft  accomplished  :  For  he  (hall  be  delivered  to  thi 
Gentiles f  and  (hall  be  mocked  andjpitefully  intreated  andJpSt  upon^ 
and  they  (hall  fcourge  him  and  pnt  him  to  death,  and  the  third  day 
he  Jhall  rife  again  :  And  they  under (lood none  of  theje  things  \  and 
thii'  faying  tvas  hid  from  them^  *t§ither  knew  they  the  things  which 
Veere  fpoken^\ 

Luke  2^.20,21,12.  {The chief  Triejls  atj^.Rul-ers  delivered 
him  to  he  condemned  to  death^and  have  crucified  hm  ;  but  Wr  truji* 
ed  t  h- 1  it  hfid  been  he  which  (hould  hav*  redeemed  ^f^ael :  and  be  * 

fik 


(19) 


fide  all  this  to  daj  ii  the  third  day  ft  nee  thefe  things  Vftre  done  ;  and 
certain  reomtn  alfo  of  ohr  company  made  us  a/ion^/bea  tpbich  Vpere 

early  at  the  ^tfitlchre 0  fools  and  jltW'  cf  heart  to  htl.eve  <t'l 

that  the  l^ro'htts  have  f^oken  /  Ouglt  not  Chrifl  to  havefuffered 
thefi  things^  and  to  enter  into  hvt  Glory  ?  verf,  45.  Then  opined  he 
their  underfianding  that  they  might  under/land  the  Scripture.  \ 

John  20.9,  [For  oiyet  they  k»ew  not  the  Scripture  that  he  mufl 
rife  again  from  the  dead.]  By  all  this  it  is  plain  that  the  Difcipks 
theitbelicvcd  noiChriJis  deuh  or  Refftrreflion. 

Yet  that  they  were  jaftificd,  is  apparent  in  many  Texts  of 
Scripture,where  Chrift  pronounccth  ihemclean  by  the  wcrdwhich 
he  had  fpoken^  John  15.5.  and  oft  called  them  ^/f/><j,  Mar,  5.  & 
l6.i'y.  Luke6.  And  he  faith  that  ribf  F^f/j^r /ot/fi^f^f^  :  John 
.  16.27.  I^cy  were  tranche' in  him  the  living  ftrrei  aftd€\boTl€d 
to  abide  in  htm^  John  1 5  5,6,7.——  And  thit  they  were  Belie- 
.vers  isoftexprcft  ,  and  particularly  that  they  Believed  m  him  as 
the  fan  of  God,   and  trufitd  it  was  he  that  fjould  redeem  Ifrael : 
that  is  by  Porver^  and  not  by  Death  :  and  that  they  took  him  for 
their  L^f after  and  Teacher, and  the  King  of  Ifrael  ^  fome  of  them 
defiring  to  Jit  at  his  right  and  left  hand  in  hus  Kingdom ,    and 
firiv ing  who  /Ijould  be  the  greateft  about  kim^  John. 16.27.  The 
Father  him/elf  love th  Jfou,  becaufe  je  have  loved  Wf ,  and  hxve  be- 
lieved that  1  came  out  from  God.']  John  i .  49.     [  Nathaniel  an- 
f'^ered  and  faith  Unto  him.,  Rabbi,  thou  art  the  fon  of  god  :  thou 
art  the  King  of  Ifrael']    Here  was  the  faving  faith  of  the  Difci- 
ples,^/4//fe.  16.16.    Simon  Peter  anfwered  and  f aid  ,  Thou  art 
Chrifl^  the  fon  of  the  living  God.  ~\ 

O bjc A.  Btit  rv,u  it  pojfible  for  t hem  to  be  jujUfed  without  the 
hloodofChrifi  ? 

ty^nfw.  No:  as  to  the  Fathers  acceptance,  his  blood  even 
then  before  it  was  (bed,  was  the  meritorious  caufe  of  their  Jufti- 
fication  :  Butthey  were  jnftificd  by  it,  without  the  knowledge 
or  belief  of  it,  thought  nor  wi'  hout  faith  in  Chrift  as  the  fon  of 
C3od,the  Mcfliah,  theRabb^ .  and  the  King  of  Ifrael.  Which 
alfo  fhews  that  faith  did  nor  then  juftifie  them  in  the  new  Notion 
of  an  Inftrumental  caufe  apprehending  the  purchafing  caufe  ; 
or  that  the  effcds  of  Chrifts  feveral  a(5ts  were  notdverfifyed  ac- 
cording to  the  feveral  ads  of  fairh  to  ihofe  as  Objeds. 

E  3  I 


C30) 


1  hope  all  that  have  Chnftian  Ingenuity  will  here  underftintf, 
that  I  IpcaK  not  (his  in  the  leiUmeafure  to  diiTuniOi  the  excel- 
lency or  necefllry  of  that  ad  of  iai  h  which  confilkth  m  the  bc- 
hcving  on  <^hrift  ascrucined,  or  in  his  blood  and  Ranloml  Or 
that  1  think  it  Icfs  nccedliry  then  the  otlicr  to  us  now    becaufe 
the  Ddciples  then  were  jullified  without  It.     1  know  the  cafe  is 
much  altered  ^  and  that  is  now  of  mccllity  to  J  uftification  that 
was  noc  then.     But  all  rhat  I  endeavour  is,   to  (hew  that  we  arc 
juftificd  by  the  other  ads  of  faich,  ss  well  asthis^bccaufeit  is  not 
likely  that  thofe  ad<;  fhould  not  be  now  jutifying,  in  con  jundi- 
cn  with  this ,  by  which  men  w-;;  e  then  juftificd  without  th.s. 

Ar^^umeKt  7.  \i  the  fat  sfad.on  and  merits  of  Chrift  be  the 
onlyObjectsof  the  jjftifyingnct  of  faith,  then  (according  to 
their  own  principles  )  they  muft  onthe  famercafon,  be  :he  only 
obiectsoF  th^  (andify  ng  and  faving  ads  of  faith.  But  the  fa- 
tisfaction  and  merit  of  Chril^  are  not  the  only  Objects  of  the 
fanctifying  and  fjving  acts  of  faith  :  therefore  nut  of  the  jufti- 
fying. 

To  this  Mr.  5/^i^f  anfwereth,  by  finding  an  Equivocation  in 
the  word  Merit ;  and  four  terms  in  the  Syliogifm  (as  in  other 
tftrms  I  had  cxprcfTed  it  J  And  Jaith  [_  We  look.  At  Clortji  for  jtt- 
fiifica  ion  as  fatisfyin^  Injiicei  and  mertting  pv  Jjn  and  ren.ijji  .**» 
not  04  meriting  fanStficatton.  []    Repl,  But  this  is  his  mifunder- 
ftanding  of  plain  words    The  term  [_  CMentor     was  not  equi- 
vocal, but  the  General  comprehending  both  effects ;    And  that 
which  he  nakedly  affirms ,    is  the  thing  which  the  Argument 
makes  againft.    Here  it  is  fuppo fed  as  a  granted  truth,  that  we 
canbenoraorefanctificd,  then  juftified  without  Chrifts  blood 
and  merits  :  and  fo  the  fcopeof  the  Argument  i<;  this    Chrift  as 
a  Ranfom  and  a  Meritor  of  fanciification,is  not  the  only  object 
of  the  fanctifying  act  of  ^aith:  therefore  by  parity  of  RcafoOi 
Chrift  as  a  Ranfom  and  Meritor  of  Juftification,is  not  the  only 
object  of  the  juftifying  act  of  faith.    The  Antecedent  of  this 
Enthymemcor  the  Minor  of  the  Argument  thus  explained,is  not 
denied  by  them.    They  confefs  that  faith  for  fandification  doth 
receive  Chrift  himfcif  not  only  as  the  Meritor  of  it,  but  as  Tea- 
cher Lord,  King,  Head,  Husband ;    and  doth  apply  his  parti- 
cular promifes.    But  the  meriting  fanctification  by  his  Blood 

and 


and  Obedience,  is  no  part  of  Chrifts  Kingly  or  Prophetical  Of- 
fice, but  belongs  to  his  Pricflhood  ,  as  well  as  the  meriting  of 
juftification  doih.  For  Chrifts  facnfice  layes  the  general 
Ground  work  of  all  the  followmg  benefits,  both  Juftihcation, 
Adoption,  Sanctification,  Glorification  :  but  it  doth  iramediatc- 
iy  effect  or  confer  none  of  them  all  •  but  there  are  appointed 
wayes  for  the  collation  of  each  one  of  them  after  the  Purchafc 
or  Ranfom.  So  that  if  the  apprehending  of  the  Ranfom  which 
is  the  general  Ground>do  only  juftifiej  then  the  apprehending  of 
the  fame  Ranfom  as  meriting  ranctification,(hould  only  fandify. 
And  neither  the  juftifying  nor  fanctifying  acts  of  faith  fhould 
refpecc  either  Chrifts  following  acts  of  his  Priefthood,  (Inter- 
rtHion  )  nor  yet  his  Kingly  or  Prophetical  office  at  al!.  And 
therefore  as  the  fanctifying  act  muft  refpect  Chrifts  following 
applicatory  acts,  and  not  the  purchafe  of  fanctiHcariononly  ; 
fo  the  juftifying  act  ( to  fpeak  as  they  )  muft  refpect  Chrift  >  fol- 
lowing Collation  or  application,  and  not  only  his  Purchafc  of 
Juftification.  And  then  I  have  that  I  plead  for  :  becaufc  Chrift 
effectively  juftifies  as  King. 

Argument  S.  It  is  the  fame  faith  in  Habit  and  Aft  by 
which  we  are  Juftified,  and  by  which  we  have  right  to  the  fpi- 
rit  of  fandification  (  for  further  degrees  J  and  Adoption,  Glo- 
rification, &c.  But  it  is  believing  in  Chrift  as  Prophet,  Prieft 
and  King,by  which  ve  have  Right  to  the  fpirit  of  fandification, 
to  Adoption  and  Glorification  :  Therefore  it  is  the  believing  in 
Chrift  as  Prophet,  Prieft  and  King,  by  which  we  are  juftifi- 
ed. 

The  m  finer  I  fuppofe  will  not  be  denyed  -  lam  fure  it  is  com- 
monly granted.    The  Al^j/r  T  prove  thus. 

If  the  true  Chriftian  faith  be  but  one  in  cfTence^and  one  un- 
divided Condition  of  all  thefe  benefits  of  the  Coveninc,  then 
it  is  the  fame  by  which  we  arejuQified,  and  have  Riglit  to  the 
other  benefits  ( that  is,  they  are  given  us  on  that  one  undivided 
Condition  JBut  the  Antecedent  is  truecas  f  prove  by  parts  thu?. 

Fitft,  Thit  it  is  but  one  in  effencc,  I  think  will  not  be  denied  ; 
If  it  b-,I  prove  it ,  firft,  from  Ephe.  4.  5.    Thtre  is  one  faith. 

Secondly,  If  Chrift  in  the  Edcntials  of  a  Saviour  to  be  be- 
lieved in,  be  but  C»^,  th^n  the  fiich  thatreceiveih  him,Ciinbe 

but 


(30 


but  One :  But  the  former  is  true :  Therefore  fo  is  the  later. 
Thirdly,  ]f  the  belief  in  Chrift  as  Prophet.  tsPricft  and  as 
l^ing,  be  but  feveral  Effenoal  parts  of  the  Chriftian  taith,  and 
not  Icveral  forts  of  faith,  and  no  one  of  them  is  the  true  Chri- 
fttan  faich  it  felf  alone  (  no  more  then  a  Head  or  a  Heart  is  a 
humane  body,  )  then  ttue  faith  is  ^«r  o»r  (  confiiftirg  of  its 
effential  paits  )  But  the  Antecedent  is  undoubted,  therefore 
fo  isrheCon'cquenr. 

Secondly,  And  as  Faith  in  Effence  is  but  One  faith,  fo  this 
One  faith  is  but  One  undivided  Condition  of  the  Covenant  of 
Grace,  and  it  is  no:  one  part  of  faith  that  is  the  Condition  of 
one  benefit,  and  another  part  of  another,  and  fothe  feveral 
benefics  given  on  feveral  ads  of  faith,  as  feveral  conditions  of 
them  :  but  the  entire  faith  in  its  ElTentialsis  the  condition  of 
each  benefit:  and  therefore  every  eflenrial  part  is  as  well  the 
Condition  of  one  promifed  benefit ,  as  of  another.  This  I 
prove  :  Firft,  In  that  Scripture  doth  nowhere  thus  divide  , 
and  maiic  one  part  of  faith  the  condition  of  Juftification,and 
another  of  Adoption,  and  another  of  Glorification  ^  c^c. 
and  therefore  it  is  not  to  be  done.  No  ma,ncan  give  theleaft 
proof  of  fuch  a  thing  from  Scripture.  It  is  before  proved  that 
its  one  entire  faith  that  is  the  Condition.  T  ill  they  that  divide 
or  multiply  conditions  according  to  the  feveral  benefits  and  ads 
of  Faith,  canprovc  their  divifien from  Scripture,  they  do  no- 
thing. 

Secondly,  we  find  in  Scripture  not  only  Believing  in  ("krifi 
made  the  One  Condition  of  all  benefits;  but  the  fame  particu- 
lar afls  or  parts  of  thi»  faith,  having  fevera!  forts  of  benefits 
afcribed  to  them  (though  doubtlcfs  but  as  parts  of  the  whole 
conditions.  )    Its  eafie,  but  needlefs  to  ftay  to  inftance. 

Thirdly,  Otherwife  it  would  follow  by  parity  of  reafon,  that 
there  muft  as  many  Conditions  of  the  Covcnantjas  there  be  be^ 
nefi:s  to  be  received  b^  it,  to  be  refpefled  by  our  faith  :  which 
would  be  apparently  abfurd.  Firft,  Becaufe  of  the  number  of- 
Conditions.Secondly,Becaufe  of  the  quality  of  them.  For  then 
not  only  Juftificationmuft  have  one  conditionj&  Adoption  ano- 
ther nnd  Sanftification  another,  and  Glorification  another ,and 
Comfort  and  Peace  of  Confcience  another  j  but  perhaps  feveral 

graces 


(C30 

;grac«  muft  have  fevcral  conditiom,  and  the  fcveral  blcflTngs 
for  our  prefent  life  and  Relations  and  Callings,  and  fo  bow  ma- 
ny forts  of  Faith  (hould  we  have  as  well  as  jultifying  faith  ?  even 
one  faith  Adopting,  another  Glontying.  &c. 

And  (  as  to  the  quality)  it  is  a  gi  ouiidleis  conceit  that  the  be- 
lief or  Acceptance  of  every  particular  inferiour  mercy  (hould  be 
our  title  to  that  particular  mercy  :  For  then  the  covccous  would 
have  tide  to  their  Riches,  becaufe  they  acce^  t  them  as  trom 
Chrift,  and  the  natural  man  would  have  this  title  to  his  health, 
andl  fe,andfoof  thereft  :  whereas  it  is  clear  that  it  is  fauh  in 
Chrift  as  Chrift,  as  God  and  man,  King,  Pricft  and  Prophet,  that 
is  the  condition  of  our  Title,  even  to  health,  and  life,  and  every 
bit  of  bread  lo  far  as  we  have  it  as  heirs  of  the  Promifc. 

The  promife  is  that  all  things  fljall^ork^togethtr  for  gcod{ViOt 
to  every  one  that  is  willing  to  have  the  benefit,  but)  to  them 
that  love  (j  d,  Rom.8.28.  ^f  we  feei^  ftrft  the  Kingdom  of  God 
andhii  Righteoufefsy  (  not  rightcoufnefs  alone,much  Icfs  pardon 
alone)  other  thingi  Jhalllfeadded^Mglth.6.'il' 

Fourthly,  If  the  Receiving  of  Chrift  as  Chrft,  effentially.be 
that  upon  which  we  have  title  to  his  benefits,  then  there  are  not 
fe  eral  acts  of  faith  receiving  thofc  feveral  benefits,  neceffary  as 
the  condition  of  our  Title  to  them.  But  the  Antecedent  is 
true  :  as  I  prove  thus. 

The  Title  to  Chrift  himfelf  includeth  a  title  to  all  thefe  bene- 
fits ( that  are  made  over  to  the  heirs  of  Promife  :  )  But  on  our 
acceptance  of  Chrift  we  have  title  to  Chrift  himfelf  :  therefore 
unon  our  acceptance  ofChrift(as  the  fimple  condition)we  have 
title  to  all  thefe  benefi's. 

Rom.S,  ^1.  [_  He  tbdt  jpared >ict  hu  orvu  fon^  but  gave  him 
up  form  all^  hew  fhallhe  not  with  him  alfo  freely  give  Ui  all 
things  ?  I  fo  that  all  things  are  given  in  the  gift  of  Chrift,  or  with 
him>  Th  erefore  Receiving  him  is  the  means  oi Receiving  all. 

I  John  5.1 1,  T  2,  {_  God  hath  given  us  eternal  life  ^and  thii  life 
u  in  his  fon  .  He  th^t  h^th  the  fon  hath  life  ;  and  he  that  hath  not 
the  fon  hath  net  t  ft.']  So  that  accepting  Chrift  as  Chrift,  makes 
him  ours  (  by  way  of  condition;  )  and  then  our  life  of  juftifica- 
tion  and  fandifitttion  is  in  him,  and  comes  with  him. 

(joining  to  Chriji  as  Chdft,  is  the  fole  undivided  condition 

F  of 


C34) 


of  Ltff^  fo^n  '5  4O.  Ye  "^illfKn  come  to  rue  that  ye  mky    hiv 
LVe.  ] 

Yet  here  T  muft  crave  that  Inqenuou;  dealngof  the  Reader, 
that  he  will  o^jferve  (  once  for  all,  and  not  exptrd  that  I  fhould 
on  every  call  recirc  it  j  thatthough'I  maintain  cheunityofthe 
condirion,  not  only  in  oppoliticn  to  a  fe^xraung  divifion  ,  bat 
alfo  to  a  diftributive  divifion  of  Conditions;yet  1  ftill  maintain 
thcfe  thr'ce  things.     Firft.chat  cjuaatimAteriile  Co-^dnijMis^  that 
faith  which  is  the  condicion,doth  believe  all  thetflential  parts  of 
Chrifts  office  dtftincllj  ;  arid  fo  it  doth  not  look  to  his  Bx  iitati  • 
o«  in  ftead  of  his  HHjj^.ilUtion-^  nor  e  Contra  \    but  looks  to  be 
/J^K/^jj^^^by  himas  a  facnfice^nni  m€yiio-4ottfij  juftifiei  by  his 
A'f eritt^  find  aSiaali^  piftified  by  him  as  /Cmj^,  Jftd^e  ,  and^«r- 
faHor^  &c.  And  that  it  eyeth  alfo^iy?/«c7/;  thofe  Benefits  which 
falvation  doth  eff  ntiallj  ccnfiil  in  (ac  leaft.)  And, it  takes  Chrtft 
finally  to  Juftifie,  Adopt,  SanAifie,    GloriHe,  ctt^.  Hjiintily, 
But  ftill  its  but  one  condition  on  which  wfehave  Titlif'to  all 
this.      ...      .  •  -l;!^,;;  ■^♦;^- 

Secondly,  Th5iil\ikmti\kih^x.mi\\zRe<dvc>orh^oif/itJ^ifi' 

cation^  the  feveral  ads  of  faith  on  feveral  objects  arediftinct 

cificientcaufesof  the  acting  of  feveral  Graces  in  the  foul.  The 

Belief  of  every  attribute  of  God,  and  every  Scripture  truth, 

hatb  a  feveral  realeffect.upon  us ;  But  it  is  not  fo  in  Jufiificati- 

an,  nor  any  receiving  of  Ri^bt  to  a  benefit  by  Divine  DonAtion; 

fdr  there  our  faith  is  not  a  true  efficient  caufcj  but  a  Condition : 

and  faith  as  a  condition  is  but  One,  though  the  efficient  a6^s  are 

-divers.    The  Belief  of  feveral  Texts  of  Scripture,  may  have  as 

many  fanctifying  effects  on  the  foul;  But  thofe  are  not  feveral 

conditions  of  our  Title  thereto.  God  faith  not  Iwill  excite  this 

Grace  if  thou  wilt  believe  this  Text,  and  that  grace  if  thou 

wilt  believe  tha  t  Text.In  the  exercife  of  Grace  God  worketh  by 

ourfelvesas  efficient  caufcs:  but  in  the  Juftifyingof  afinncr, 

God  doth  it  wholly  and  immediately  himfelf  without  any  Co- 

cificicncy ofourown,   though  wemuft havethedifpofitionor 

Condition. . 

Thirdiy ,  I  ftill  affirm,  that  this  One  undivided  condition  may 
have  divers  appellations  from  the  Refpect  to  the  Cotift^uent  bc- 
aefits  (fori  will  not  call  them  the  tS^ftsi^ )  This  one  faith  may 

fee 


C  55>r  ^ 

be  denominated  (  importing  only  thcTnfercft  of  a  conditfon  ) 

ti<ifiifying  faith,  ^f^r^tfjiuj^  faith,  an  ^Atrfting  faith,  a  f*vn'g 
faith,  ^rejerving  faith,  (^c.  But  this  is  only,  if  not  by  ^'xrrin- 
fick  denomination,  at  the  moft  but  a  Virtual  or  RelGti'i.'  di- 
ftindion  •  /$  the  fame  Center  may  have  divers  denominuions 
from  the  feveral  lines  that  meet  in  it :  Or  the  fade  PiMaror 
Rock  maybcEatt,  Weft, North,  or  South,  ad  Uvzm,  vef  «d 
ciextram  ,  in  refped  to  feveral  other  Correlates  :  O:  (  plainly^ 
as  one  and  the  fame  Antecedent,  hath  diver?  denominations 
from  feveral  (^'cMfeaueutt,  So  if  you  could  give  me  health, 
wealth,  Honor,  Comfort,  &c.  on  the  condition  that  I  would 
but  fay  One  word  {_  I  thanks  you :  ]  that  one  word,  might  be 
denominated  an  enriching  word,an  honouring  word,  a  comfort- 
ing word  ftom  the  feveral  Confequents.  And  fo  may  faith.  But 
this  makes  neither  the  ^fateriaU,  nor  the  Formale  of  the  Condi- 
tion to  be  divers :  cither  the  faich  it  felf,  or  condition  of  the 
Promife. 

Argument  9.  If  there  be  in  the  very  nature  of  a  Covcnaric 
Condition  in  general,  and  of  Gods  impofed  Condition  in  fpeci- 
cial,  enough  to  pcrfwade  us  that  the  benefit  dependeth  ufually 
as  much  or  more  on  feme  other  ad,  as  on  that  which  acccpteth 
the  benefit  it  felf:  thenwchavereafonto  judge  that  our  Jufti- 
firation  dependeth  as  much  on  force  other  ad,  as  on  the  accep- 
tance of  Juftification  ;  but  the  Antecedent  isri^ue,  as  I  prove; 
Firft,-' As  to  Covenant  Condition  in  general,  it  is  moft  ufual 
to  make  the  promife  confift  of  fomwhac  which  the  party  is  wil- 
ling of,  and  the  condition  to  confift  of  fomcvvhat  which  the 
Promifer  will  have;  but  the  Receiver  hath  more  need  to  be 
drawn  to.  And  therefore  it  is  that  the  Accepting  of  the  bene- 
fit promifed  is  feldome,  if  ever,  ekprefl^  tiiade  the  Condition 
( though  implicitly  it  be  part ;  jbecaiifelt  is'  fappofed  that  the 
party  is  willing  of  it.  Batihatis  made  the  exprefs  condition, 
where  the  party  is  moft  unwilling:  So  when  a  Rebel  hach  a  par- 
don granted  on  condition  he  come  in,  and  ky  down  arms ,  it  is 
fuppofed  that  he  muft  humbly  and  than'^ftillv  accept  the  par- 
don J  and  his  returning  to  his  allegi-^nte' ,  is  as  truly  the  condi- 
tion of  his  pardon,  as  the  putting  forth  his  hand  and  taking  it 
is.  If  a  Prince  do  offer  hirtifelf  in  raaraiagc  to  the  pooreft  Beg- 

F  2  gar, 


(?<5) 


gar,  and  confcquently  ofltr  Riches  and  Honors  wich  himfelf, 
ihc  accepting  of  his  perfon  is  the  exprefTed  condition,  more 
then  the  accepting  of  the  riches  and  honors ;  and  the  latter  dc- 
pendeth  on  the  former.  If  a  Father  give  his  Ton  a  purle  of  gold 
on  condition  he  will  but  kneel  down  to  him,  or  ask  bimfor- 
givenefsof  fome  fault-  here  his  kneeling  down  and  asking  him 
forgivenefs,  doth  more  to  the  procurement  of  the  gold,  then 
putting  forth  his  hand  and  taking  ir. 

Secondly,  And  as  for  Cods  Covenant /« /;;fc<V, it  is  moft  cer- 
tain, that  God  is  his  own  end,  and  made  and  duth  all  things  for 
bimfelf.    And  therefore  it  were  blafphemy  to  Hiy  that  the  Cove- 
nant of  Grace  were  fo  free  as  to  refpeft  Wi<»/  wants  only,  and 
not  Gods  Honor  and  Ends,  yea  or  man  before  God.  And  there- 
fore nothing  is  more  certain  then  tliatbothas  tothe  endf,  and 
mode  of  the  Covenant,  it  principally  refpcfte:h  the  Honor  of 
God.    And  this  is  it  that  man  is  moft  backward  to,  though 
moft  obi  ged  to.    And  therefore  its  apparent  that  this  muft  be 
part,  yea  the  principal  part  of  the  condition.    Every  man  would 
have  pardon  and  be  faved  from  hel  :    God  hath  promifed  this 
which  you  wottU  have-on  condition  you  will  yield  to  that  which 
mtmally  yoW^Pould  not  have.  You  Would  have  Happinefs;  but 
GodVi:ihhave  his  preeminence  ;  and  therefore  youfjall  have 
no  Happinefs  but  in  him.   Y o^vpomU  have  ^\r don  :    but  God 
villhuve  fubjcdion,and  ChriftmV/^df^  the  honour  of  being 
the  bountifull  procurer  of  it,  and  w/7/bc  your  I  ord,  and  Tea- 
cher, and  Sanftifier  as  well  as  Ranfom :  1  f  you  will  yield  to  one, . 
you  (hall  have  the  other.   So  that  your  J  uftification  dcpendeth 
as  much  on  your  T  aking  Chrift  for  your  Lord  and  Mafter,  as  on 
your  receiving  Juftification  or  confenting  to  be  pardoned  by 
him.    Yea  the  very  mode  of  your  acceptance  of  Chrift  himfelf 
and  thebenefi  soffcre  1  you,   (  that  you  take  them  thaDkfully, 
lovingly,  humbly,  renouncing  your  own  worth,  &c.  )    are  nc- 
ceff/ry  parts  of  the  condition  of  your  pardon.  There  is  as  grt  at 
aNeceltity  laid  upon  that  part  of  the  Condition  which  Chtifts 
honour  lieth  on  ,  and  that  in  order  to  your  Juftification  ,    as  of 
that  part  which  diredly  refpcdcib  your  Salvation.     And  me 
thlrks  common  reafon  and  ingenuity  (honld  tell  you  that  it  reufl: 
h^  fo^  and  chat  its  jud  and  mcec  it  (hould  be  fo.    And  cbercfore 

I  i 


C^7) 


I  may  fafely  ccnc'udc  exnaturarei  ,  that  the  talking  of  Cbrift  for 
our  'eicherandLordJsas  truly  a  part  of  the  condit  on  ofour 
Juftificarion,  andour  lurtificacion  liech  as  much  upon  it,  as  the 
Alfiancein  Chrifts  fuffcrings. 

Jf  you  fiy,  []  ^lii  (be  efficiency  is  mt  fq'Aal^thoHgh  it  he  equiliy 
a  [ond.tl^in  J  1  anfwerj  Neither  of  them  havc  any  proper  effi- 
ciency in  jultifying  us,  unkfs  you  will  unfitly  ca'l  the  Conditn- 
naluy  an  EfftcteKcji ^otibc  Acce^tableyeji  or  believing  in  the  fifiht 
of  God,  an  efficiency;  there  is  no  fuch  thing  co  be  afcribcd  to 
our  fdith  as  to  the  cffcdt  of  Juftification.But  this  belongs  to  ano- 
ther Controverfie. 

J  k'low  not  what  can  be  faid  more  agiinft  this,  unlcfs  by  the 
Antinonjttns  who  deny  the  covenant  of  Grace  to  have  any  pro- 
per Condition,  bu:  only  a  priority  and  pofterioriry  of  Duties* 
Buaheexprefs  conditional  terms  of  the  Covenmt  do  put  this 
(o  far  out  of  doubt,  and  I  have  faid  fo  much  of  it  in  other  writ- 
ings, that  I  fhall  not  trouble  ray  fclf  here  with  this  fort  of  Ad- 
vcrfaries :    Only  to  prevent  their  miftake,  1  fliall  tell  them  this : 
that  in  a  condition  there  is  fomewhat  Ejjentialy  and  that  is  found 
in  the  conditions  of  Gods  Promife  j  and  therefore  they  are  pro- 
per conditions:  an  i  there  is  fomewhat  e^^^ccidental  -.  asFirft,, 
fometime  that  the  thing  be  V^<(erta':n  to  the  Promifer :    This  is 
not  in  Gods  Conditions  ;  It  is  enough  that  in  their  own  nature 
the  things  be  contingent.     Secondly,   That  the  matter  of  the 
condition  be  fomewhat  that  is  gainfull  to  the  Promifer^or  other- 
wife  havc  a  merit,  or  moral  cauf^lity  ;    Bur  this  is  feparable  : 
In  our  cafe  it  is  fufficient  that  it  be  foaicwhat  rh^tCod  I  keth^ 
/oveth,  or  is  pl<"afingto  him,  th  ugh  it  properlv  merit  not. 

And  the  evident  Reafon  why  God  h^i'h  m?.de  (ome  Piomifes 
conditional,  is,that  his  Laws  and  Promifer  m..y  be  pciredly  fuit- 
cd  to  the  nature  of  man  on  whom  chey  mult  work,  and  fo  may 
(hew  forth  Gods  Infinite  Wifdom,  and  may  in  h  way  agreeable 
to  our  natures  attain  their  ends :  ani  man  :;ai  he  dra-.vn  to  that 
which  he  i^  back-vird  to, by  rhe  help  of  that  whicb  la  is  natural- 
ly more  forward  to,  oi  by  the  ^car  of  that  evil  whcl-  naturally 
hcdoih  abhor  :  Asal'o  that  iho  Holiju's  o<^  God  mav  fii  ue: 
forth  m  his  Word  J  and  it  may  be  feen  that  he  loverh  Jaftice, 
Hoiinefs,  Obedience, and  not  only  the  perfonsof  men  ;  and  fo 

F3,  all. 


C38) 

all  his  Attributes  may  be  fecn  in  their  conjunction  and  tlie  bcaa- 
ty  that  thence  rcfuUeth  in  the  Glafs  of  bis  Word> 

Argument  10  If  the  condemning  Ur.belief  which  is  the 
Privation  of  the  faith  by  which  we  are  juttifitd,  be  the  Not-be- 
belicvingin  Chrift  asKing,Prieft  and  Prophet, than  the  faith  by 
which  we  arc  jaftificd,  is  the  believing  in  him  as  King,  Prieft  and 
Prophet.  But  the  Antecedent  is  true  :  therefore  fo  is  the  Coil- 
fequent. 

Only  the  Antecedent  needs  proof,  though  the  Confcquence 
have  the  hard  hap  to  be  denyed  alfo. 

Here  note,  that  by  The  condemning  ZJnbelisfy  I  mean  f  hat 
which  is  the  peremptory-condemning  (in  according  to  the  fpe- 
cial  Commination  of  the  Gofpcl :  Where  I  fuppofe  firft,  that 
there  is  a  condemnation  of  the  Law  of  Nature  or  works,  which 
is  fimply  for  fin  as  fin. Secondly,  And  a  diftindl  condemnation 
by  the  New  Law  of  Grace, which  is  not  Hmply  for  fin  as  fin,but 
for  one  fort  of  fin  in  fpecial.that  is,the  final  rejection  of  the  Re- 
fnedy  :  And  of  this  fort  of  condemnation  I  (peak  in  the  Argu- 
nient.  The  confirmation  of  thisdiftindion  Iftiall'  be  further 
called  to  anon  by  Mr.  'BLke. 

The  Antecedent  I  prove.   Firft,  from  John  g.  18,19,20,?.!. 
(^  He  that  believeth  on  him  it  not  condemned ^{^^ here's  the  jultify- 
ing  faith :  )  But  he  that  bclteveth  yiot ,  u   condemned  already^ 
(Thcrcs  the  condemning  unbeltef,concradidory  to  the  juftfj'ing 
faith  )  \_Becaufe  he  hMh  not  believed  cm  the  name  of  the  onij  he^ot' 
ten  Son  of  god :  ]    (  here  is  a  fpccial  condemnation  proved, 
^iftind  from  that  by  the  Law  of  works.  )   [[  Anii  tbii  ii  the  cor.- 
demnAtion  (  ihsLt  is  the  condemning  y?;?  or  c^ufe)  th/tt  light  is 
come  into  the  Vcorld,  and  men  loved  dA->  k*i(fs  rather  then  Itghtj  be- 
cauje  their  dtedtvreyc  evil^    For  every  one  that  dcth  evil  hate'ttf 
tht  light,  &c.  The  19  verfedefcribeih  the  Condemning  Unbi^- 
licf,  and  the  2o.gives  the  reafon  of  mens  guiltinefs  of  ir.  And  tht 
unbelief  defcribed  is  a  (hunning  or  not  coming  to  Chrift  a«i  he 
is  the  Light  to  difcover  and  heal  their  evil  deeds. So  that  if  con- 
tradiftories  will  but  fliew  the  nature  of  each  o.hcr,    I  think 
our  controverfie  is  here  plainly  refolved. 

So  is  it  in  Ffai.  2. 12.  [  Kife  the  Son  Itfi  he  hi  angri^  and  je 
ferijhfrom  the  ^ajf  -,  when  his  ^rath  is  kindled  ifUt  4  litth,   iiejfed 


are 


CiP) 


are  allthej  that  put  their  trufi  in  him.~]  The  faith  that  favcs  from 
punifhmenr,  faveth  from  Guile  :  the  faith  that  faves  from 
^uilr,  is  jultifying  faich  :  The  faith  here  dtfcribed  ,  is  that 
which  favv'sfrom  p^nifhment:  And  the  faith  here  defcribed  is 
r  k:ffi"g  the  Vtf«, ;  whid^comprehendjrch  fubjccflion,  anddep.eH- 
d.ince,  and  love  ;  and  is  the  fame  for  all  that,  which  is  afccf 

called  [_  trujlinn  m  fjirtl.  ] 

So  Luk.^  19*  J7  C  lit*-  thofe.mim  enemiet  yvbkh  would tfot 
tk^t  I  (7:o'*Ur.itntj  over  (hem,  bri^g  hither  ,  a-<i  deflroy  ih-'tf  be- 
fore we.  1  UnwilJing'iefs  to  have  Chrift  raign  over  tbem,  is 
here  made  (  not  a  common,  but  )  the  fpjcial  tondemni,ng  lip, 
called  commonly  Unbelief ;  and  fo  is  ihe  contrary  to  jullifying 
faiih. 

So  fohn  5.  36.  r  Hethtt  beleveth  on  the  ?<?«,  (  this  as  all 
confels,  is  juOifying  fiith  )  ha:heverlAJli>ig  life  \  a  -dhe  th^t  be- 
Ifjetveth  r.ot  the  Sm,  jhiUnot  fee  Ufe,  but  the  tv^ath  of  God  abid- 
eth  on  kiot.  ]  Here  it  is  apparent  that  this  Unbelief  is  the  pri- 
vation, the  contradictory  orcontiary  to  juftifying  faith. Firlt, 
becaufc  they  are  fo  directly  oppofed  here  denominacively,  that 
elfc  the  words  would  be  eq'jivocal,an  i  not  inrelligible.Secondly^ 
Bccaufc  the  contrariety  of  cfftdsalfois  added  to  put  the  thing 
.pa(^  doubt.  (2  The  \\>ra:h  of  God  ,ibideth  on  klm  ;  is  contrary  to 
vifiifjing^  which  takes  the  ivrath  o^  God  off  him  ;  efpecially 
confideringjthat  it  is  curfing,  comminatory,  obliging  wrath  thac 
is  principally  meant,-  the  great  executing  wrath  being  not  on 
men  till  their  damnation. 

And  that  materially  this  unbelief  thus  oppofed  tojulifying 
faith  doth  confift  in  contumacy, rebellion, or  unperAwsdabknefs, 
is  plain  in  the   words ,  C  °  3  am^^v  tJ  vid.  ^   which  fignifie  * 
r  They  that  are  ccntumaciof^s  or  difobeditnt  to  the  Son,  or  unfer- 
f^adible,  ] 

And  I  '^oh>i$.  10  I  T,i2.This  faith  and  unbelief  are  oppofed; 
and  the  unbelief  corfiftcth  in  [  .not  beli^vifigjhe  record th^t  God 
h*th  fiven  of  his  \on  ]  and  tbxt  record  isinotonly  concerning 
juftification,  orthemericof  it. 

So  2.  Thtf  ,2.  12.  C  Thut  all  they  mi^ht  be  damned^  ^ha 
believed  not  the  truth,  but  had  pieafwe  in  t4!irighteofifnefs.  ^  So 
2  Thcff,  1.8,9,  I  o.  [  That  obey  not  the  Gofpel  of  our  Lord  Jefus 

Chrift  ] 


(4^) 


Chrifi  ]  is  the  defcriptlon  of  the  VrfhlievtrSiO^^poCed  to  {them 
thatbtligve,'\\tT,  lO. 

So  Jo.  8.  24.  [  //  jt  beittve  rctthat  I amhe^j': PjuU  die  injour 
7>»;,]which  as  to  the  act  and  effect  is  contrary  co  jultitv  ing  taitli. 
Ax\^\_tl:At  1  em  ke\\%  riot  or\\y\^  that  f  am  the  RAnfvme  \    tut 
alfo  [_that  1  am  the  ' yiUJfiah  and  Redeemer.'^ 

So  John  16.8,9.  Q  He  ^Ull  reprove  the  rvorld  of  fin. 

(  not  only  in  general  that  they  are  finners ,    hue  of  this  fin  in 
specie)  hecaufe  thej  believed  n»t  in  me?\ 

Many  texts  may  be  cited  where  juftifying  faith  and  condemn- 
ing unbelief  are  defcribed  from  acts  o\  the  undcrftanding 
{  though  the  will  be  imply ed  )  as  believing^  or  net  beliei  i>fg  that 
Chnji «  the  fen  ofQod^tcc.  which  cannot  poffibly  be  reftraincd 
to  his  Ranfom  and  Merit  alone. 

The  Confequencc  cannot  be  denyed,  if  it  be  but  underflood 
that  ihis  unbelief  doth  thus  f feci  a/I jr  condemn,  not  in  general  as 
fin,  or  by  the  meer  greatnefs  of  it,  but  as  the  privation  of  that 
faith  by  which  only  men  are  juftified.  For  Privatives  (hew  what 
the  Pofitives  are.  And  if  this  unbelief  did  condemn  only  as  a 
fin  in  general, then  ail  fin  would  condemn  as  it  doth  :  butthat  is 
falfe.  And  if  it  condemned  only  as  a  great  fin,  then  firft,  every 
(in  as  great  would  condemn  as  it  doth;  and  fecondly,  it  would 
be  Derogatory  to  the  precioufnefs  and  power  of  the  Remedy, 
which  is  lufficient  ^gairft  the  greateit  fins,  as  great :  It  remains 
therefore  that  as  it  is  not  for  the  fpccial  worth  of  faith  above  all 
other  Graces,  that  God  afilgncd  i^  to  be  the  condition  of  JulHfi- 
cation;  foil  is  not  for  a  fpecial  greatnefs  in  the  fin  of  unbelief 
thae  it  is  the  fpccially  condemning  fin  ,  but  as  it  is  the  Privation 
of  that  faith  (which  Jhecaufc  [of  its^^  peculiar  aptitude  to  that 
Office,  is  made  of  ^uch  ncceflicy  to  our  Juftification. 

But  faith  Mr,  B/ake  (^  **  Thit  it  like  the  old  Argtimert ;  Evil 
**  vfork^  merit  condrmKation  :  therefore  good  Vcorks  ment  falvati- 
*^  on.  Anitlnjeaning  damtjs  cur  good  meaning',  therefore  (aves."^ 

Repl.  Firft,  A  p3lpjblerai^ake.  Meriting,  and  faving  by  me- 
rit, arc  effefts  or  efficienccs./o  pl'^i oly  feparablc  from  the  things 
themfelvcs,  that  the  invalid'tv  of  the  Con fcquence  eafily  ap- 
pears:  i^'Utingoodfadnefs,  did  you  believe  when  you  wrote 
this,  that  he  that  argueth  from  the  defcnption  or  nature  of  a  pri- 
vation, 


C+i) 


vation,toctiedcrcriptionorn;»iurcofthc  thlnj^.ot  which  it  is  the 
Privation,  or  rhacargueth  from  the  Law  of  oppofies  and  con- 
tradidions,doih  at-guc  Ike  him  that  argues  from  the  mora!  fepa- 
rable  tffi  Jcncy,  or  effed  of  the  one,  to  the  like  efficiency  or  ef- 
fect ot  the  other? 

Secondly  But  underft-ind  me  to  argue  from  the  effed  it  felf  if 
you  pleafe.fo  it  be  as  affiled  by  the  unchangeable  Law  or  Cove- 
nant of  ■'.  od  :  I  duubt  nor  but  the  Argument  will  hold  good. As 
under  the  Law  of  works  it  was  a  good  argument  to  (si)\?^t-per- 
ftH-obeytngis  the  condemning  evit  :   therefore  perfetl'cbejinqit 
the piJiif)mgco':ditio».]S<'i  is  it  a  good  argument  under  the  Cove- 
nant of  Grace  ro  fay-  Not-helievmg  in  Chnfl  m  King  ,Prie(}  and 
Prophet ^  is  the  fpecijllj-co^demmHg  nnbeliefi  therefore  btlitving  in 
Chrifi  a<  Kiig,Priej}  &  Prophet  ^m  the  faith  b)  Which  ire  are  jfifii- 
fed'^  The  main  force  of  the  reafon  lyeth  here  ,  becaufe  elfe  the 
Covenant  were  equivocating, and  not  Intell!gible,ifwhen  it  faith 
\^He  thut  believeth  pjallbefa'iied^tnd,  he  that  believeth  not  fhallbe 
damned~]    ft  did  fpeak  of  onekind  or  2(5t  of  faith  i  none  Pro- 
poficion,andof  another  in  the  other.    If  when  itisfaid  ,  [  He 
thatbeltevethpj^ll  be  jujiiftd  from  alhhingt^Bi.c,  and  he  that 
believeth  not  (hall  be  co^hmned^   \  if  you  btlieve  you  pjall  not 
come  ittts  condemnation  ;   but  if  you  believe  not^you  are  condemned^ 
and  the  rvra^h  ofGodabideth  on  ycti  ]  [  f/f  that  believeth  jhall  be 
fo^givtny  andhe  that  believeth  not  pjall  not  be  forgiven  "J  I  fay, 
if  the  Affirmative  and  Negative  Proportions,  thcProraife  and 
the  Threatning  do  not  here  fpeak  of  the  fame  believing,  but  di- 
vers, then  there  is  no  hope  that  we  (hould  underftand  thcm.and 
the  language  would  ncceflitatc  us  to  err..    NowthePapifts  Ar- 
gument 4^  rj^^^whach  no  fuch  bottom  \  Bad Tvork,!  damn, they e- 
fore  good  irorkj  f*ve.  For  the  Covenant  is  not    [^He  that  doth 
^oodWorkj  fyaUbe  faved  ^   andH)i  t hit  doth  badtpotk.s  /hall  be 
condemned]    But  \  he  th-it  obejeth  ferfe^Jlj  Jhall b:-  y4{li'.td^  and 
hethatdothnot  Jhall  be  condemned^   Of  if  they  argue  from  the 
thrcatningofthcGofpelagainftbad  works, to  the  merit  ofgood, 
quoad  modum  procurandi  ^\tw\\\r\oiho\diyViz>  that  Evil  varies 
procure  damnation  by  way  of  merit  :  therefore  good  Workt  procure 
falvation  hyn>ay  of  merit.  For  there  is  not  eaiem  ratio^  and  fo  no 
ground  for  the  Confequcnce ;  Nor  dtd  I  argue  ad  rmdum  pro- 

G  CHlrandiC^ 


C  urAyidi-^\  Rtjt^irg  Ch>  ijl  m  Kir)^  doth  condemn  by  waj  cf  mirit; 
thtrehre accenting  htm  04  King  doth  (ave  hj  Veay  of  ttierit '\'\h\s 
was  none  of  my  arguing  :  but  tMs  [_  RejeSli.,g  or  mt  believirg  in 
Chrift  <w  Ktng^  u  part  cf  that  Z^r.helitf  nhich  u  hj  the  La'iQ  of 
Qracct  thrtatned  with  cortdtmnatim  :  t her t fore  acctpting  or  belie- 
ving in  Chrifi  oi  K'mg^ii  part  of  that  faith  rvhich  hath  the  Prontife 
ofjttflification  []  And  fo  if  a  Papift  fhould  argue,  not  ad  modunt 
procurandi,  but  ad  nathram  a5Iuj  &  tjft^t  j  1  would  juftifie  his 
Argument  Q  Ratgningfin,  RebeQ^on^or  the  abfence  of  Ev anodic al 
good  ft'ori^j^M  Threatned  by  theGofpel  vi-hcondewKiition  at  J^dge- 
ment  :  therefore  goodrrorkj  have  the  Promife  of  fuU  At  ion,  or  jh- 
jii^cation  at  Judgement?^ 

And  that  I  may  and  muft  thus  underftard  (he  Condemning 
Threatning,and  thejuftifyingpromife,  tofpeakof  one  and  the 
fame  faith,  I  am  aflured  by  this:  becaufe  it  is  ofual  wich  God 
infcripturc  to  imply  the  one  in  the  other.     As  in  the  Law  of 
works  with  perfect  ma'  ,the  promife  was  not  expreft,  but  imply- 
ed  in  theThreatningj]]  In  the  d.ty  that  thou  eatefl  thereof^  thou 
Jhalt  die.  3j     So  in  the  Gofpel  the  Thrcatning  is  oft  implyed  in 
the  promife  [  He  that  believethJhnUnot  perifh  3  When  the  Lor4 
faith  [  The  foul  that  ftnreth  Jhall  die  1  It  implyech  that  [  the 
fvnl  that firjneth  not  fliall not  die.  ]    And  though  we  cannot  fay 
the  like  of  the  prohibition  of  Sating  the  forbidden  fruit,that  is, 
becaufe  the  fame  Law  did  on  the  fame  terms  prohibitc  all  other 
fin  as  well  as  it.     And  [[  in  the  day  that  thou  ftnneft^  thou  Jhalt 
die  ]  doth  imply    Q  if  thou  fin  not^  thou  Jhalt  not  die.    ]    So 
\_  he  th/it  believeth,  Jhall  befaved,  ]  doth  imply,  he  that  believeth 
notf  Jhall  be  condemned.  And  fo,  If  thou  i>elieve^  thcuJhaUbe 
jufiifed,  implyeth,  //  thou  believe  not,    thou  Jhalt  net  be  jujiifed, 
Jf  you  confent  not  to  this,  you  then  muft  maintain  that  this  Co- 
venant exdcdeth  not  Infidels  frgra  falvation,the  term  only  being 
not  implyed  in  the  promife  of  pardon  to  Believers :  But  if 
you  grant  all  this,  (  as  fure  you  will  )  then  it  is  moft  evident 
that  Believing  is  taken  in  the  fame  fenfe  in  the  promife,  and  in 
the  threatning  :  For  no  man  breathing  can  tell  me ,  either  how 
a  Promife  to  one  kind  of  faith,  can  imply  a  threatning  againft 
the  want  of  another  kind  or  aft  of  faith  j    or  elfe  what  that 
other  faith  itmft  be  chat  is  fo  implyed,  if  nocche  fame.     And 
•  if 


C4-3) 


if  it  be  the  fame  faith  that  isimplyed  (  w'lich  isamoftevidenc 
truth  ;  then  it  wH  follow  thit  it  I  prove  the  Threatned  unbc- 
Jiefrobe  a  Kejedingot  Chrift  as  King,  the  faith  then  that  is 
made  the  condition  of  ihepromif,", mult  be  the  accepting  of  him 
as  King  as  Wtll  as  Prieih  But  I  have  proved  that  not  be- 
lieving m  C  hnft  as  King,  is  part  of  the  unbelief  that  isfpecial. 
ly  rhicacned  weith  condemnation  •  therefore  believing  in  him 
asK'rg  is  parr  of  that  faith  which  hath  the  ptotnife,  or  is  the 
ConditK  n  of  Jufttfication. 

But  faith  Mr.  3  i^',  [  I  furlhtr  anfw(r  ^  RejeFlin^  Chriji 
as  Kt>  gt  ts  a  Jill  a^^l  -jt  the  moral  Law,  yvkkh  d.4mns  :  Tet  fomc 
•pchit  more  theof^bjfSiim  to  the  lMotaL  ^cdp  is  rtqnired  that  a 
finner  m^y  brfived  ] 

Repl.  Formy  pait,  I  know  no  Law  but  moral  Law.  Its 
aftrange  Law  that  is  not  Moral  as  itis  a  ftrange  K^rimal ihs^i 
is  not  ijtiii  Phyftcum.  Buc  yet  I  partly  unde-^rtand  what  fome 
others  mean  by  the  phrafe  cJ^or<j/  Z^nv-  bnt  v>  hat  ycu  mean 
I  cannot  tell,  for  all  your  two  volumns.  And  it*,  to  (mUl 
purpofc  to  difpute  upon  terms  whofefcnfc  we  be  not  agecd  in, 
nor  do  not  underftand  one  another  in  :  And  you  mult  better 
agree  with  yourfelves  before  you  agree  with  me;  1  cannot  iQ- 
Conci\e  thefe  fpeec  he  s» 
Mr.  Blakf  of  the    C  I  j^wo^V  no  other  Rule  hnt  the  old  Rule: 

Covenant,  fag.  <:^   the  Rule  of  the  Moral  Lii^".  xhaturciih 

III.  C^  mea  Rule^a  ferfefl  Rule, an  -i  the  only  Rule, 

Mr.    B'^kj  here.    C   Tet  fotte'^hAt  more  then  fubjf^ton  to  the 

pag.^6^.  <^    Aioral Lavftsreqitiredt  that afinnermay 

C  hefaved. 

I  am  confident  you  will  allow  me  to  think  you  mean  fome- 
what  more  ex  parte  noflri.  and  x\ozor)\y  ex  parte  Chrtfti-.  And 
can  ihM J omsTvhtt  morebe  required  without  any  Rule  requiring 
it  ?  And  yet  I  find  you  fometimes  feeming  offended  with  me, 
for  telling  you  1  underftand  you  not. 

•  But  I  further  anfweryou  :  The  re jeAing of  Chrift  as  King, 
is  no  further  a  lin  againft  the  Moral  Law,  then  the  accepting  him 
as  King,  is  a  duty  of  the  Moral  I  aw.  Will  you  not  bcl  eve 
this  without  a  Difpute ,  when  you  are  told  by  /*W,tkit  W'here 
tbtre  it  no  Law^  there  is  no  trAnj^reffion^^xA  elfewhere  that  [%n  is  a 

G  2  ,  tranfgrtjjion 


Ch) 


tranfgrejfion  of  the  Law  ?  And  need  not  ftand  tp  prove  that  the 
fame  Law  which  ts  the  Rule  prefcribrng  duty,  is  the  Rule  difco- 
vcrinq  fin,  even  that  fin  which  is  the  Privation  of  that  duty. 
1  defire  no  Readers  that  will  not  receive  thcfe  things  without  any 
more  arguing. 

Mr-  BUke  adds  Q  VMbelief/f^'eff-;.\prc^:rly^dothot  at  all 
condemn,  further  then  as  it  is  a  breath  of  a  Moral  _  ommar.dmer.t. 
The  privation  of  >^hich  you  feak^orJy  holds  the ftntence  of  the 
La^  in  force  and  fo^er  agan^  us  :  wh.ch  tne  th'mkj  ffvjuld  be 
J eur  judgement  as  ^-ellas  fnine,  feting  you  are  VVo»f  to  compare  the 
ner»  Lctw  'as  you  cull  it  )  to  an  a6l  of  oblivi>.n  :     And  an   a^of 

oblivion  fives  many^bu:  condemns  none. ] 

Bepl.lt  IS  in  more  th*none  thingl  perceive  that  we  differ. ^ut 
this  is  a  truch  that  you  muft  not  fo  eafily  take  out  of  our  hands. 
Though  having  had  occafion  to  fpeak  largely  of  it  elfewhere, 
I  ftiall  fay  but  httie  now. 

Firft,  Again,  I  know  no  Commandment  that  is  not  moral. 
But  if  you  mean  by  Afcril  the  Commandment  either  racerly 
as  delivered  by  A/oft-s,  or  as  written  in  Nature  ;  I  am  not  of 
your  mind,  nor  ever  (hall  be.  To  be  void  of  the  belief  of 
thefc  A)  ctctes  of  the  fairh  f  that  thia  Jefus  is  the  Chrijl,  that  he 
^4r  aHually  conceived  hy  the  Holy  Ghofljjorn  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
fffertd  under  Pontius  P-Iatc,  iV<8/  crucified,  dead  and  buried  :  Kofe 
again  the  third  day .^  ajcendedinio  Heaven  ;  fitteth  tn  our  nature  at 
the  right  h^nd  of  Cod ;  gave  the  H.ly  '''hofi  to  hit  Apoflles  to 
confirm  tht  'Dc^rine  of  the  Qofpel  1  with  many  more  j  doth  cou- 
demnfur'her  then  as  it  is  a  breach  cither  of  the  Molaical  or 
Natural  Law  :  yea  in  forae  rcfpeds  as  it  is  no  breach  of  thofe 
Laws. 

And  yer  fhe  fame  fin  materially  may  be  a  breach  of  fevcral 
Laws  J  and  condemned  by  fcveraL 

Secondly  vou  vcr/  much  miltake  mv  Judgement  here  ,  if 
you  think  it  the  fame  with  yours  ;  Nor  will  the  mention  of 
an  adt  of  oblivion  jultifte  vour  nuftake  I  [uppol'c  an  A<ft  of  obli- 
vion m  iy  pofTibly  h  »vc  a  Penalty  anexed,(  as,  thac  all  that  ftand 
ou,  and  accept  nO' of  this  pa-dttnby  fuch  ayear  or  day,  iVall 
be  rfmtdile(s,  and  lyabic  to  a  greater  Penalty,  ^  And  I  think 
if  no  Penalty  be  named,  there  is  oncimplyed. 

For 


(45) 


For  my  part,  T  am  fatisficd  that  the  Rcmedyinp  taw,  or  the 
Lav  of  Grace  ,  hath  its  fpecial  Thr€atnlng,whenl  fo  often  read 
if,  I  Ht  th.st  beUevctlo  fjJlhefave^,  a»d  he  thtt  heiitveth  not 
pjall  be  Pawned]  and  [_  unfefs  ye  believe  that  ^  amhe,  ye  pyall 
dieinyotirftm.  ]  And  I  cake  it  to  ditferfrom  the  Threatningof 
the  law  of  i'. oiks,  thus. 

Firft,  In  the  matter  of  the  condition  ;  which  is  not  fin  in 
gcner-il ;  any  fin:  bu: a /re<:».</fin,  %iz.  the  final  rejedirgthc 
Remedy  ;  that  is ,  Refufing  to  turn  to  O  d  by  fai  h  in 
Chnft. 

Secondly,  In  the  Penalty:  Firft,  The  Gofpel  Penalty  ^  \s 
Non-liberation  from  the  curfe  of  the  Law.  Nor  to  be  forgio; 
vcnor  faved.  This  had  been  but  a  Negation,  and  not  Pe- 
nal, if  there  had  been  iio  Chnft  and  C  ofpti:  But  k  is  a  pri- 
vation and  penal,  now ,  becaufe  by  a  fpecial  fin,  we  forfeit  onr 
hopes  and  poflib'lities.  Secondly,  As  to  the  dcg''ec,I  fii  d  it 
Will  b.  a  far  forer  punlfhment,  Heh.  lo.  29.  The  Law  of 
greateft  v-race doth  threaten  the  greateft  pun  fhment.  \  hirdiy. 
And  doubclcfs  in  Hell,  Confciencewill  have  a  fpecial  kind  of 
Accufa'ions  and  felf  tormentings ,  in  reflcding  on  the  refufals 
of  the  remedy,  and  treading  under  foot  the  blood  of  the  new 
Covenant ;  which  is  a  pumfhment  that  was  never  threarned  by 
the  Covenant  of  works.  Fourthly,  And  there  will  be  a  Priva- 
tion of  a  greater  Glory,  then  ever  was  promifed  under  the  Law 
of  works  Fifthly,  As  alfoofa  fpecia' fortof  eternal  felicity, 
confiding  in  loving  the  Redeemer,  and  finging  the  fong  of  the 
Lamb,    and  beii:g  his  members,  e^r. 

Thirdiv',  And  as  there  are  ihefe  five^diflFerences  in  the  Penal- 
ty, befides  that  of  the  Condition  of  it,  fo  is  there  a  confidera- 
ble  modal  diff^renc  in  the  confummation  it  felf.  v'z.-  that  of 
theL^w  of  works  was  not  peremptory,  excluding  a  Remedy; 
b'Jt  the  Threatning  of  the  Law  of  Grace  is  peremptory,  exclu- 
ding all  further  Remedy  to  all  Eternity :  which  I  think  is  a 
mo^  weighty  difference.  I  koow.thisisnot  mnch  pertinent  to 
oiir  p-efent  *  ontrovetfi.'j  but  you  have  made  it  necefTary  for 
me  hu<  to  touch  it  :  But  1  fh'll  nordigrefs  now  to  prove  it 
tor^o^ethat  fceitno--  by  its  own  licht :  But  I  mu ft  fay,  that 
if  I  (hoald  be  drawn  by  you  to  deny  it,  1  (hould  have  bar  & 

G  3  ftrange 


(+0 


ftrange  Method  of  Theology  inmyundcrftanding,  and  (hould 
thinK  » lee  open  the  door  to  more  Errors  then  a  fciV. 
So  much  for  the  proof  of  the  Fhe^i. 
The  Piincipal  wo  k  is  yet  bihinJ    which  i>  to  confute  the 
Arguments  OJ  the  Opponents.      I  call  it  the  Principal  work, 
becaufe  itis  'ncumb  nt  on  them  to  prove    who  make  the  limi- 
tation and  rcftrid.on  and  add  a  new  propofuion  to  the  Dodrine 
of  the  Oofpel ;  and  till  the;  have  proved  ihis  propolition,  our 
ground  is  good  ;  we  fay  that  []  B  ieving  in  the  Lord  itfm  Chri(i 
u  the  futh  bj  which  ^eare  ]f*lt  d'-d  [_  and  thi«  is  pall  denyal   in 
the  Scriptures.  They  fay,that  Q  8el  eving  ii  htm  xt  j  RAnfom  and 
*P»rch^fer^or  Appnhtndtn^  hi)  Righ'eoujr.efs  uthe  onij  n8i  offa>th 
by  which  we  are  jufiified,  ]]  and  not  alfo  Believing  in  him  as  i  ord^ 
Teacher.  IntcrccfTor,  ^c    When  they  have  proved  the  reftri- 
dion  and  exclufion,  as  well  as  we  prove  our  AlTertion  that  ex- 
cludcth  no  edential  part  of  faith,  then  the  work  is  done,  and  till 
then  they  have  done  nothing. 

And  firft,  before  I  come  to  their  Arguments,  I  fhallconfider 
of  thar  great  Diftindion,  which  containeth  much  of  their  opinio 
on,  and  which  is  the  principall  Engine  to  deftroy  all  oar  Argu- 
ments for  the  contrary.     And  it  is  to  this  purpofe. 

\^*BelievtMginthe  Lord^efm  (^hriji at  Ktrjg^Teacher,~\S>LC.is  the 
'*  fides  quae  J  uftificat,  hm  it  jufiifieth  not  qua  talis  •  hut  qua  fides 
*•  inChriftum  fatisfacientcm.^if.  Fides  qua  J  uftificat ,  mufi  be 
•*  d'/ii^guf/hedfrom  fides  quae  J  uftificat.  A  man  that  hath  tyet 
*'■  doth  ht^r^andthAt  hath  ears  doth  fee {  but  he  bearethnot  as  he 
•'  hath  ejest  but  04  he  hath  ears  ;  And  he  feeth  not  oi  he  hath  ears^ 
**  hut  M  he  hath  eyes.  So  f tilth  ^hich  helieveth  in  Chrifl  as  King 
*'  doth  jufiifiey  but  not  qua  talis,  <w  it  heitevethin  him  at  KingJ;Mt 
J'  as  it  helieveth  w  him^  or apprehendeth  him  as  our  Righteowfnefs, 

Kept.  As  juft  and  neceffary  Diftindion  riddeth  us  out  of  the 
fruitlcfs  perplexity  of  confufeddifputings;  founfound  Dift.nfli- 
ons,efpec:ally  with  feeraing  fubtiity,  are  Engines  to  deceive  and 
lead  us  into  the  dark.  Tbelaft  time  I  anfwered  this  Di- 
ftinction,  I  was  fo  improvident  as  to  fay,  that,it  [  it  is  the  general 
cheat  ]  meaning  no  more  then  a  F^^^c/. and  thinking  the  word 
had  fignificd  no  worfe:  But  Mr,  Blaise  publirtieih  this  Comment 
9*a.i;ha«  fyllable  ^jyind  as  it  [terns  yon  have  met  ^ithapack^of  Jnu 


ay) 


poflort^  ati^  that  of  the  mofi  Learned  in  the  Land,  that  out  of  their 
great  Condtjcififion  have  written  for  your  fatisfanion,  Thu  word 
yoH  think,  founds  harfhlj  from  Mr.  Crandon ,  oi  indeed  it  doth  9 
and  it  no  fmall  hlemifh  to  his  great  faivs  •,  you  may  thtn  judgt 
hoVlP  it  ^ill  found  fromyoftrfe/f  in  the  ears  of  others. 

Such  infinuations,as  if  it  were  to  breed  difTention  between 
thofc  Learned  Brethren  and  ray  felf,  are  not  fair  dealing.  FirftJ 
d  o  not  remember  one  or  two  at  moft  of  ail  thofe  Brethren,  thac 
in  their  Papers  to  me.ufed  that  diftindion /How  then  can  you 
tell  the  world  in  print ,  that  it  fecms  I  have  met  with  a  pack 
of  Irapoftors ,  even  them  you  mention  ?  Did  you  ever  fee 
my  Papers.or  theirs?  Did  they  ever  tell  you  that  this  diftindi- 
on  is  in  them  ?  I  folcmnly  profefs  it  was  not  in  my  thoughts  fo 
much  as  to  intimate  that  any  one  of  their  Papers  was  guilty  of 
thatdiftindion.  But  if  you  will  fay  fo,  what  remedy  But  per- 
haps I  intimate  (o  much  in  ray  wordsjin  what  words  ?  when  I  fay,' 
thii[_all  that  I  have  to  do  withy  grant  the  Antecedent  ]  and  whats 
that  to  the  queftion  in  handpmany  a  hundred  may  grant  that  this 
ad  is  t\\zfide!:  ^«rf,  that  aflert  not  the  other  aiS  to  be  the  fides 
qtta^  and  allow  not  th  e  ufe  of  the  diftin<^ion  which  I  refift* 
But  perhaps  its  my  next  words  that  imply  it  Q  For  the  general 
cheat  if  by  the  di(iin[lion  of  fides  (jua  and  ^ua^  &c.  ]  But  fure  it 
cannot  be  underftood,that  its  general  with  al  the  world,  nor  ge- 
neral as  CO  all  that  I  have  had  to  do  with:There  is  no  fuch  thing 
faid  or  meant  by  me  ;  for  then  it  muft  extend  to  all  that  are  of 
my  own  mind  :  and  I  told  Mr.  'B/akf  enough  of  the  contrary  as 
to  theperfonshementioneth,  by  telling /fc^rw  how  they  owned 
not  the  Inftrumentality  of  faich,and  then  they  cannot  well  main- 
tain this  ufe  of  this  diftindion.  It  is  the  general  deceit  or 
cheat  of  aH  that  are  deceived  by  itjand  of  moft  that  in  this  point 
oppofe  me.  But  if  Mr.  Biake  think  either  that  all  that  vouch'- 
fafe  me  their  writings ,  do  it  by  way  of  oppofition  (  when  many 
do  it  but  by  explication  and  reconciliation  )  or  that  all  that  op- 
pofe mc,do  oppofe  me  in  that  point,hc  thinks  no  truer  then  her© 
he  writes. 

Secondly.  And  as  he  feigneth  mc  to  fpeak  of  many  reverend 
pcrfons  that  I  never  meant,  fo  he  feigneth  me  to  take  them  aflu- 
ally  for  Impoftors,  bccaufc  I  take  the  diftinctlon  for  a  cheat. 

But 


C+S) 


But  is  it  not  poffiSle  that  ic  may  cheat  or  deceive  themfelves, 
though  fomc  never  utter  it  to  the  deceiving -jf  othcs  ?  Much 
lefs  as  impoito;  s  with  arTin.ention  co  deceive  :  I  would  you  had 
never  learned  chis  art  of  c  infutacion.  . 

Thirdlyj  But  I  perceive  h.^w  you  would  tike  it  if  I  had  «p- 
plyed  this  to  your  fclf.      And  what  is  this,  but  i>l<iinl;/ to  forbid 
roe  to  d  fpute  with  ynu  ?  (  which  I  had  n^vcr  done  on  other 
lern:)sthen  for  Defence.  )  Can  I  not  cell  you  chat  your  Argu- 
ment is  aFaliacy,  but  you  wili  thus  exclaim  of  rae,  as  making 
youanlmpoftoi  ?  why  then  if  vou  be  fo  tender, who  may  deal 
wich  you  ?  On  the  fi'.ne  grounds  if  I  fay  that  your  Major  or 
Minor  is  falfe   you  miy  tell  the  world  I  make  you  a  Lyar;  and 
I  rauft  either  fay  as  you  fay,  or  let  you  alone  •  left  by  contra- 
di<Sion  I  make  you  a  Lyar  or  an  Impoftor.     Prove  that  ever  I 
blamed  Mr.  Crando»  for  fuch  a  paffage  as  this,  if  you  can.  It 
as  notLti5;«»'or,!/]  thus  appl^'ed,bnt  other  words  that  I  excepted 
againft ;     I  will  not  yet  believe  it  all  one  to  call  an  Argu* 
ment  or  diftindion  a  chsAt  or  falhcy^  and  to  call  the  perfon  a 
Cheater  and  Deceiver,  aud  thatdeiignedly.as  purpofely  diffem- 
bling  his  Religion. 

Mr.  Blak^e  proceeds,     []  Andlnittchmitrvelthoitthls  dijltK- 

"  Hiofj^that  everywhere  el fe  n'otiidpafs,  andheconfe^ed  to  be  of 

^^  neceffitj^  to  Avoid  cor^HJlon  in  th(^e  diJiinU  capacities  in  which 

^'men  Mfnallj  aBf  pjouldhere  not  alone  h  que/lioned,  but  thus 

*•'  hronded.     Dots  not  every  man  that  undergoes  varioHJ  reUtious^ 

**  vanouflf  aEl  according  to  them  ?  And  do  not  men  that  m^k^  ad' 

**  drefs ,  aMreJi  themfelves  in  like  variety  ?     He  thAt  is  at  once  a 

'*  Hnsband-^aVarent ^aCMaJierya  School-mifier^a  Phr/iciant  a[ls 

**  vdriokfly  according  to  all  oftheje  capacities.     Some  come  to  hint 

^'  Ma  Father,  fome  as  a  Maflevy  fome  as  a  Teacher  j  all  of  them 

"*  come  to  him  as  a  Phyjician :   But  only  they  that  come  to  him  as 

'^^  a  Phyjician  are  cured  by  him.    Believers  through  faith  go    to 

"  Chrtfl  ihat  bears  all  the  Relations  mentioned.    But  .?i  they  feel^ 

**  fatitfa^ion  in  his  blood- Jhedding^   which  is  an  aU  of  his  Priefi- 

*'  hood^  they  are  juflified,  ] 

%jpl.   I  ever  granted  that  we  are  juftified  by  trufting  in 
€hff.ifts  blood  I   But  not  []  only  ]  by  that. 
Sec^ndJy ,  It  was  God  thac  fought  fatiifaftion  in  Chrifts 

bloodg 


(+p) 


blood ,  the  Believer  fceks  for  the  fruit  of  that  fatisfadi- 
tion. 

Thirdly,  But  row  to  the  diftindion,  I  fha  11  tell  ycu  freely 
m  y  thought  of  it,  and  the  reafons  of  my  rcfiftingyour  ufe  of 
it,  and  then  anfwcr  your  reafons  for  it. 

And  fir  ft,  We  nuift  under  ftand  what  it  is  that  is  diflinguifh- 
ed  :  whether  the  Habit  of  faith,  or  the  Ads?  As  far  as  lam 
able  to  underftand  them, they  that  underftand  themfelves,  do  in- 
tend to  dittinguifh  of  the  Habit  by  a  virtual  diflindion,  and 
their  meaning  is  [_  The  Habit  of  Faith  Vrhichproc'nceth  both  thtfg 
a6ls  ■'cth  jtiflifie :  hut  notai  it frodnceth  the  aH:  of  belitvmg  in 
Chrifi  as  Lord^Teachir,  Sec.  but  oi  it  proditceth  the  A^  of  belie' 
viy!g  tn  ht^  b/ood']  that  !«,[  "^he  habit  is  the  remote  cau[e-,ancL  the  a5i 
ii  the  nearer  canje  ;    and  the  habit jufiifeth  b)  thir  «^^,  and  not 
by  the  tther.  J     I  verily  think  this  is  their  meaning;  I  am  fure 
this  is  the  moil  probable  and  rational  that  I  can  imagine.  Buc 
then  firft,  Thiscontradiderh  their  ordinary  affertion,  that  it  is 
not  the  Habit  of  faith,  but  the  a6l  by  which  we  are  juftified. 
Secondly,    Then  they  do  not  mean  that  the  ait  of  believing  in 
Chriftas  Lord,  &c.  is  fo  much  as  the  fides  (jua,  which  if  they 
will  fpeak  out  and  make  no  more  ado,  the  controverfie  will  be 
much  better  undcrftood.     For  then  it  is  a  queftion  thatscafily 
apprehended,  tf^hether  only  the  a^i  of  faith  tn(^hrifls  fatisfaCiiou 
do  juftifie^  or  the  bilieving  in  Chrifi  oi  King,  Triefi  and  Prophet^ 
or  all  thn  ii  ejfentijl  to  Ch'^ifiiati  faith  J  This  is  a  plain  cafe ; 
which  fides  ^t^a  and  tjua  do  not  illuflrate. 

But  then  f  muft  add,  that  this  begs  the  queftion  asufedby 
them,  but  dccideth  it  not.  And  as  i_^fsa  ]  relpecteth  but  the 
Matter  of  the  condition  ;  q.  d.  The  h.ibit  as  it  produceth 
this  ,iCi,  and  not  that^  it  the  condit'ton  of  Juflification  ]  (  for  elfe  ic 
juftificth  neither  <«  it  produceth  the  one  or  the  other  j)fo  it  is 
the  very  Queftion  between  us ,  Whether  it  be  one  aft,  or  the 
whole  cflfence  of  the  Chriftian  faith  that  is  the  Condition  ? 

And  this  fuppofeth  the  determination  of  other  controvcrfies 
that  are  not  yet  determined.  There  are  three  opinions  of  the 
Habit  of  faith.  Firft  that  the  feveral  acts  of  faith,  have  feveral 
habits  S.'condiy,  that  the  divers  ads  have  but  one  habit  of 
faith  diftind  from  the  habits  of  other  graces.     Thirdly ,  Tbae 

H  ^^ 


(TO) 


faith,  love,and  all  graces  have  bat  one  habit.  If  the  fi  ft  hold, 
then  the  dilti.idi  )n  as  before  explained  hach  noplace.  If  he 
laft  hold,  then  the  Habit  of  Love,  or  Fear,  may  be  on  the  fame 
ground,  (aid  to  julific. 

If  I  have  before  h.t  on  their  meaning,  then  the  diftinftionof 
the  Habit  hv:rtn^iii,  ipd  the  di  tmccion  of  the  aAs  \srea/:j, 
and  they  totally  exclude  all  acts,  fave  that  which  they  fix  upon; 
not  from  being  prefenr,  but  from  a  co-mcereft.  Bat  from  what 
incerell  ?  Of  a  <^aufe  ?  that  wc  deny  even  to  all  :  Of  a  Condi- 
tion? that  they  grant  co  thefe  which  they  exclude. 

Next,  wc  rauft  underftand  the  members  of  their  Diftinction  : 
And  fometime  they  exprefs  one  branch  to  be  Q  ficles  tju  i  jn  '}ifi~ 
c^it'^  and  fomztimc  l  fides  ^itii  appreheytJ.it  Chnflum  Utitfucten' 
tern,  dec. '^  As  to  the  former,  it  cannot  be  contradiftmct  from 
\_  fauhinCh^if  as  Lord^~^  but  from  faith  2.sfAnEiif^ingSzc.\l 
bemgbut  a  denominative  or  virtual  didindion  of  one   and 
the  ume  faith,  from  the  feveral  confequents.     And  fo  1  cafily 
grant  that  fijes  <j  ictjnfiificat-,  nonfanEiificAt  vel  glortficat,  and 
fo  of  all  the  confeqacnts  of  it.    A?  it  is  the  condition  of  one,  it 
isnot  the  condition  of  the  other  :  which  is  no  more,  then  to 
fay  that  there  is  between  the  confequents  Difim^io  re.tlis  ,  from 
wlience  the  Antecedent(Really  the  fame  )may  bedenominativc- 
ly  or  virtually  diftmguiflied  ;    As  the  fame  man  that  goeth  be- 
fore a  hundred  particular  men,  hath  a  hundred  diftinct  Relati- 
ons to  them^  as  Before  them  all.    The  very  fame  condition  in  a 
free   Oift ,  may  be  the  condition  of  many  hundred  benefits, 
and  accordingly  be  Relatively  and  dcnominativcly  diftmguiOi- 
ed  ^  when  yet  it  is  as  truly  thecon:itionofallas  ofone.and  hath 
equal  interert  as  to  the  procurement. 

And  as  for  the  other  phrafe  that  [  fides  tjua  recipit  Chrifiatn 
fatiifacientem^jafiificut ,  ~\  properly  it  is  falfe  Docrine  ;  if  cjua 
fignifiethe  neareft  lleafonof  faiths  intereft  in  procuring  |ufti- 
fication^  for  then  it  is  but  to  fay  that  [^  fides ^  c^na  fiJes^jajtifeat  ] 
which  is  falfe.  The  denomination  and  the  dcfcription  exprefs 
but  the  fame  thing  ;  fides  is  the  denomination;  and  Receptio 
Chrifli  is  the  defcription-  if  therefore  it  Jaftific  ^ua  Receptio 
Chr$fii,  then  it  juftifieth  qe^a  fides^  that  is,  ^«<i  hac  fides  irtfpecie  '. 
Whi<;h  is  to  afcribc  it  to  the  ttj  credere  with  a  witnefs,  And  clfc  - 

where 


on 


where  I    have  diTproved   it   by  many  Arguments.' 

But  if  ^M^  be  taken  lefs  ppoperly,a5  denoting  only  the  apti- 
tude of  feith  ro  be  the  condition  of  Juftification,  then  ftill  the 
Qj^eftion  is  begged.  For  we  fay>  that  as  the  act  of  believing 
in  Chrifts  bloo:l-(hed  hath  a  fpecial  aptitude  in  one  refpect,fo  the 
act  of  believing  iH  hisRefurrcction,  Interceflion,  &c.  and  re- 
ceiving him  a^Kmg,  Teacher,  &c.  hath  a  fpecial  aptitude  in 
other  refpects,  upon  whic'li  God  haih  certainly  made  them  the 
Conditions  of  our  Juftihcation  with  the  other. 

But  if  any  (hould  diftinguifh  of  the  act  of  faith,and  not  the 
Habit ,  and  fay  that  [^  t'des  qua  credit  in  Chrifium  ut  Regem^ 
j  u[}tp:atj  fed  non  Cfuci  credit  in  Chri(lum  fit  Regem  ]  I  accept  the 
former  as  being  all  thatldehre,  and  grant  the  latter  :  But  then 
1  fay  the  like  or  the  ciher  act  of  faith,  that  [_fides  qua  credit  in 
Chrtffum  f^tisfucieMtem  non  j  n Jit  fie  at  ^  htQ2iXiSc  fides  <j 'a^fiies^noyi 
jftfiificat,  /ei  fidtsqu^  conditio  pr^fltta.^  And  1  think  I  need 
to  lay  no  more  for  th^  opening  the  Fallacy,  that  this  diftindi, 
onufcth  to  cover. 

And  now  I  come  to  perufe  all  that  I  can  find  that  is  pro- 
duced to  fupport  this  diftinction.  And  the  moft  is  certain  pre- 
tended fimilitudes  ,  that  have  little  or  no  limilitude  as  to 
this. 

The  common  fimilitude  is  [_  A  man  that  it  oculatus  heareth, 
but  not  qua  oculatus,  btft  qua  auritus  ,  &c.  ~]  Repl.  Firft,  If  you 
take  qua.  ftrictly,  the  affirmative  is  not  true.  For  then  Iquatenus 
ad  omne^  every  man  that  is  auritus  would  hear:  whereas  he 
m3i\  ft'P  his  ears,  and  be  where  i<s  no  found,  (^c.  Andaman 
that  hath  eyes  may  wink,  and  be  in  the  dark,  crc.  Secondly, 
If  ^«/i  fignifie  the  aptitude,  orcaufal  intcreil,  I  deny  the  fimi- 
litude ,  It  \sdijftmile  :  and  the  reafonof  the  difference  is  evi- 
dent ;  for  a  mans  eyes  are  Phyfical  efficient  caufes  of  his  fight, 
and  his  ears  of  hearing ;  naturally  in  their  aptitude  and  pote nti' 
ality  determined  to  their  proper  objects :  but  faith  is  no  effici- 
ent caufe  of  our  juftification  or  ofour  intereft  in  Chrift  at  all; 
much  lefs  a  Phyfical  efficient  caufe.  i5ut  the  Intereft  if  hath  is 
Morai,which  dependeth  on  the  Donors  will  i  and  it  is  no  higher 
then  that  of  a  condition  :  and  theieforc  the  act  that  Phyfically 
hath  leaft  refpcct  to  the  object,  may  in  this  cafe  if  the  Donor 

H2  pleafc, 


CfO 


pKaf'c,  do  as  much  to  procure  a  Title  to  !t,  as  that  which  hath 
the  ncareft  phyfical  rcfpect  to  \t.  A^f  you  have  a  deed  of 
Gift  of  a  Countrey  on  Condition  you  will  difcover  a  Traitor, 
or  marry  one  that  oweth  it :  here  the  alien  act  hath  more  intc- 
reftm  procuring  your  Title,  then  your  /I pprthenditt^,  or  tread- 
ing on  the  foi!,or  taking  poffeilion  yea  or  accepting  the  deed  of 
Girt  it  felf.  So  God  hath  mace  our  Accepting  of  whole  Chrift 
to  b:  the  condition  of  life  and  pardon  ;  and  confequently,  the 
Accepting  him  in  other  Rehtions  ( in  which  he  dellroyeth 
fin,  advanceth  God,  c^c.  )  doth  as  much  to  our  Juftificati- 
on  as  the  accepting  him  atour  Ranfome. 

Now  to  Mr.  BLtkes  Reafons .-  when  he  faith  that  this  ^iflin- 
Bio»  Kvouh  fifs  every  where  dfe  ai  r<ece[[ary^\\e  is  much  miftaken: 
for  as  he  doth  not  tell  us  at  all  what  fort  of  diftinction  it  is,  whe- 
ther Reaiij^  Rjiionis-,  Mod  Ms  ^  Formilis,  Vtrtualu^  Qcc.  fo  I 
could  give  him  an  hundred  inftances  in  which  it  will  not  pafs  in 
any  tolerable  fenfe  ,  but  what  are  his  own  felect  inftances, 
from  a  mans  various  Relations  to  the  variety  of  his  actions 
and  their  effects.  But  is  it  Chrifl  or  the  believer  that  you  puc 
in  thefe  various  Relations  ?  Its  plain  that  you  mean  Chriit :  But 
thats  nothing  to  the  queftion  :  1  maintain  as  well  as  you  that 
Chrifl:  performeth  variety  of  works,  according  to  the  divers 
parts  of  his  office,  and  that  he  meriteth  not  J  uftification  as  King, 
but  as  a  Sacrifice  ;  as  he  effectively  juftificth,  not  as  a  facnfice, 
but  as  a  King;  and  he  teacheth  as  a  Teacher,  e^c.  this  was 
never  denyed  by  me«  But  the  quefiion  is  whether  the  Intereft 
of  the  feveral  acts  of  our  faith  be  accordingly  diftinct  -  which 
I  deny,  a.nd  confdeKtly  deny .  In  the  works  that  Chrift  doth 
in  thefe  feveral  Relations,  there  is  dt/liticfi^realis,  and  Chrift  is 
the  proper  efficient  caufeof  them.  But  though  our  faith  muft 
accept  Chrift  in  all  thefe  Relations,  and  to  do  the  feveral  works 
in  the  feveral  Relations,  yet  it  is  no  proper  caufe  of  the  effects, 
and  [  as  I  faid  }  the  intereft  it  hath  in  the  procurement  is  meerly 
moral ,  and  that  but  of  a  condition,  and  therefore  it  is  to  be. 
iudged  of  by  the  will  of  the  Donor« 

But  you  fay  that  i  o«/y  thej  that  comt  to  Chrifl  as  a  Thyftcian 
an  cfsred  bj  him  ]  Repl.  Very  true  :  I  nevertlenyed  it  •  But  not 
only  Bj  camiKg  to  him  as  a  Phjfifian ;  efpccially  as  the  Worker 
ofthis  one  part  of  the  cure.  You 


(53) 


You  add  [  'Believers  through  faith  go  to  Chrfl  thjit  hireth  all 
"  the  ReUtions  mentioneili^fir  04  the)  feek^fttisfu^lion  i^i  kis  blood- 
Jher^di-if,the)a'e  Jujiifted.  J  Repl.  Very  true  (  if  by  rff  you 
underftand  only  the  3p:irudc  of  the  act  to  its  office,  and  the  cer- 
tain connexion  of  the  eft-ed  :  otherwif'e  it  is  not  as  they  beheve 
at  all  that  they  are  juftificd; ,  but  it  is  not  only  as  they  feek  fatis- 
faction  in  his  blood;  butalfo  as  they  believe  in  him  as  King, 
Teacher,  Rifinp,  interceding,  cr-''  Though  it  be  Chnfts  blood, 
and  not  his  Dominion  ,  that  Ranfometh  us ;  ycc  his  promife 
giveth  the  fruit  of  chat  blood  as  well  on  the  condition  of  be- 
lieving m  him  as  King,  r.s  of  the  believing  in  his  blood.  Hither- 
to we  have  come  (bore  of  your  proofs,  wh^ch  next  we  ftiall  pro- 
ceed to,  and  freely  examine. 

Mr.  Blake.  /  fjall  take  the  bodlnefs  to  give  in  my  Argument Sy 
to  make g'lodthxt  fjitth  in  Chr  Jl  qui  Lord^dothnot  ]u(iifie. 
Fir^^Tbat  uhi^hthe  types  tinker  the  Ur?^af  pointed  for  Atonement 
And  exp  atioMj  lead  us  unto  in  Chrifl,  our  faith  mu(i  eye  for  a- 
tonement ^  exp.ation^  And  recfmciltAtion  ;  this  cannot  be  denyed  : 
Theft  Leviiical Types  lead  ut  doubtlefs  to  aright  object  ,  being 
Schoo'mtjlers  to  leadui  unto  Chrifl^  and  Jhaddorvs  whereof  he  ts 
the  fubfiance  :  As  Alfo  to  th^t  office  in  him  {^ho  is  the  object  of 
faith)  which  ferves  for  th^t  work  :  But  thefe  types  lead  us  to  Chrifi 
in  his  Pi  if  lily  office  for  the  mofi  part  as  facrificing.  fometime  a*  »«- 
/frcf^r«^,^})b«  1.29.2  C<jr.  5.  21.  I  Pet,\.  iS.  tyfgre^tfirt  of 
the  Ef^fHe  to  the  Heb.  is  a  proof  of  it,~\ 

Reply  I  grant  you  both  Major  and  Minor:but  the  queftion  is  a 
meer  ftr  mger  to  the  Juft  conclufion  Firft,  't  will  not  follow, be- 
caufe  our  faith  mufteye  Chriftas  Prieft  for  Reconciliation, 
that  therefore  it  muft  eye  him  only  as  Prieft  for  Reconciliation. 
And  \?  only  be  not  in  ,.your  cxdufion  of  other  acts  of  faith 
follow^  not. 

Secondly,  No,  nor  if  it  were  in  neither  :  for  ex  parte  (fhrifii 
for  Reconciliation  ow/yChrifts  Priefthood  is  to  be  eyed  as  the 
meritorious  caufe  (  fpeaking  in  their  fenfc  that  take  the  prieftly 
office  to  comprehend  not  onl/  Chrift  as  Sacnficer.  but  as  facri- 
fice,yea  &  as  obeying  in  the  form  of  a  fervant,the  ficnefs  where- 
oft  now  pafs  by.  J  but  ex  parte  noflri^  the  fo  eying  him  is  not  the 
enly  act  of  faith  by  which  we  arc  juftified  ;  fq  that/or  is  ambigu- 

H3  OUS' 


ous ;  and  either  fignifieth  Chrifts  procurement  of  our  Juftifi- 
cation.cr  o«rj  :  In  the  former  fcrfe  grant  as  aforcf.i;d,  thefe 
Types  ftiew  us  that  Chuik  oniy  as  Prielt  and  facr  I'ce  doth  fa- 
tishc  for  us.  But  as  to  the  procuring  Intertfi  of  our  faith,  thefe 
Types  ftiew  us  not  that  oKh  this  act  procureth  ourlntereft.  Nor 
is  there  a  word  in  the  texts  you  mention  to  prove  any  fuch  thing; 
Jo. I.  ip.faith  that,ChriftLf^e  Lamb  of  GodtakethaVe'jftbe  finof 
the  worlds  J  but  it  doth  not  fay  that  only  bcliev  ng  in  him  as  the 
Lamb  of  God  is  the  faith  upon  which  we  have  part  in  his  blood, 
and  are  juftified  by  him.  i  Pet.  i .  1 8.  tels  us  we  ^e^e  Rtdeemed 
bj  his  precious  blood;  but  it  doth  not  tell  us  that  only  believing 
in  that  blood  is  the  faith  by  which  we  have  intereft  in  it-buccon- 
tranly  thus  defcribes  that  fauh,z'^r.  21.  [  ivhobj  bimdo  believe 
in  God  that  raifed  him  from  the  dead^andgave  himglnrj^  t  hut  your 
fattb  and  hcfe  might  be  in  God.  ]  2.  ^or.  5.21.  tell?  us  that  he 
■ivasmadeftnfcruj,6cc.  but  it  faith  not  that  our  believing  thus 
much  only,is  the  full  condition  of  our  Intctett  inhis  Righreouf- 
nefs;But  contrarily  exprefleth  it  by  \_  our  o^n  being  reconciled  to 
God  ]  to  which  ^Paul  exhorteth. 

Thirdly,  I  he  Types  which  you  mention,  were  not  all  the  Gof- 
pel(orCovenant  of  Grace,orPromife  )  then  extant :  If  there- 
fore there  were  any  other  paics  of  Gods  word  then  ,  that  led 
them  to  Receive  Lhnft  entirely  as  the  AUJfiuh,  and  particular- 
ly as  the  K;ng  and  Teacher  of  his  Church,  and  promifed  life  and 
pardon  on  this  condition,  your  Argument  then  from  the  Types 
alone   is  vain;  becaufe  they  were  not  the  whole  word  ('unlefs 
you  prove  that  they  exclude  the  reft,  which  you  never  can.) 
i^nd  indeed  not  only  the  very  firft  promife  of  the  feed  of  the 
woman,^c.doth  hold  out  whole  Chrift  as  Prieft,andProphet  and 
King   as  the  objed  of  juftifying  faith,  but  alfo  many  and  many 
another  in  the  old  Teftament.And  the  Epiftle  to  the  Hebrews 
which  you  cite,  doth  begin  with  his  Kingly  office  as  the  objed 
ofour  faith  in  the  two  hrft  chapters^  which  are  almoft  all  taken 
up  in  proving  it. 

Fourthly,  you  confefs  your  felf  that  Chrift  as  Interceding 
is  ■'  he  objed  of  juftifying  fa  th ;  and  if  you  mean  it  of  his  Hea- 
venly interccifion  ;  that  was  no  part  of  his  meritorious  obcdi- 
dience  or  bumiliatiop  .Its  true  indeed,  that  it  is  for  the  applica. 

tion 


(55) 


tion  or  Collation  of  the  fruits  of  his  blood,  ami  fo  is  much  of 
his  Kingly  and  P.ophetical  orfi».e  roo. 

.4/r.  Blake."  Sfcordli^  Thac  which  the  Sacramtnts  ttnde^r  the 
Qofpel^  [ttting  forth  (^hnfi  for  p^irdon  of  Jin,  lead  tts  unto^  that 
cttr  faith  wuji  e)e  for  Recjnciltation^  Pardon  a>i.4  fhjfificatio)/. 
This  it  dear.  Chriji  in  his  o'^n  inflitnted  ordin/Mces  Vfft/{>Joe  vuf- 
gnde  us ;   'Bti'-  thefe  U  id  hs  to  Christ  juffiring^^^  djin^  for  thgpar- 

din  of  fi^^  Mac  26  28.  A  broat^'n^  ble^diyig^  ^J^'*^  Chriji 

in  the  L>rds  >upper  is  received. 

i?7>/j',Firft,I  hope  you  would  not  m  «ke  th-';  .vorlu  believe  chac 
I  deny  ic ;  Did  lever  exclude  a  dying  Chrirt  fiom  the  oSj  v.^ 
of  juftifyingfaich  ?  Bat  what  ftrange  Arguments  ate  rhefr,  chat 
arefu^h  ftrangers  ftill  tofhcquellion  ?  yon  pmvc  rhe  inclulioii 
of  [  faith  in  Chrtj}  dying.,  j  buc  do  not  To  much  as  m.'ntion  the 
exclufion  of  the  other  ads  of  faith,  which  is  che  thing  that  was 
incumbent  on  you. 

Secondly  ,  If  you  fay  that  [  only  ^  is  meant  by  you,  though  not 
exprefll'd,  then  I  further  r(^ply,thac  this  Nrgum-.-nc  labou.ingof 
the  fame  difeafe  wih  the  lalt,reqii  rcth  no  other  mfwer.  Firft  , 
The  Sacraments  being  not  the  -vhole  Go'pel.you  cannot  prove 
your  ExclttfioH  from  them  unlefs  you  prove  fomewhac  ex'-luftve 
in  them  (  which  you  atrempt  not, chat  1  fee,)  Secondly,  If  there- 
fore you  underftand  the  Minor  exclufivcl  ,  as  to  all  other  parts 
of  Chrifts  {.fficej  deny  it,  and  the  texts  cited  fay  not  a  word  to 
prove  it.  Thirdly  And  if  they  did, yet  faith  may  eye  a  dying  Cbrift 
only  as  purchafiig  Pardon  ;  and  y^z  ex  parte  Chrtjit  that  aft 
that  fo  eyeth  him  may  not  be  the  only  ad:  that  is  the  condirion 
of  our  Ti:le  to  a  dying  Chrift  or  to  the  pardon  purchaied. 
Fourthly, And  yct(though  it  would  not  ferve  your  turt))evi;n  tx 
fnyteChnfli^  your  exclufion  is  fo  far  from  being  proved  thac  its 
contradided  boih  by  the  Sicrament*  and  by  Scriptures  :  much 
more  tx parte  no/lriyyour  excujion  o(  the  Other  ads  of  fa^th. For 
FirU,ln  Baptifm  its  app.ircnr(which  is  appointed  for  our  fol'^mn 
initiation  into  a  ftate  of  J  unification  ^  whch  the  Lords  Supper 
is  not. )  Firft,  Chrift  foundech  it  in  his  Dominion,  '^fit.zS. 
18.    <iyi U po^er  ii given  to  me  in  Heaven  und  Eat-th  :  go  ye  there' 
fore  &c.  Secondly,  He  makerh  the  very  nature  of  it  to  be  an 
entering  men  into  a  ftate  of  Difci^^ies,   and  fo  engaging  them 

to 


C5<^) 


tohlmastheirMafler,  ver.  ip,  G0  je  therefore  auJ  Difcife 
(  £r  teach)  all  7>{aticr,s,  haptiz.ingtbeni.  Thirdly,  The  words 
of  the  Jews  to  ]ohn(^  ^f  thou  he  not  that  Chrifl  nor  EllaJ,  nor  thit 
Prophet^  Vch)  hptize/l  thou  ?  John  I-  25.  )  and  iheir  flocking 
to  his  baptilm,  and  the  words  of  Patt/y  i  Cor.  14.  15,  (  lth.i"k 

God  that  ^  hafti^ed  mne  of  you, hfl  anj  fljculdjUj  ,  th^t  I 

l>apti^ed  in  mj  own  name^do  plainly  ftiew  that  baptizing  was  then 
taken,  as  an  entering  into  a  ftarc  of  Difciples.     Ard    have  be- 
fore proved  that  baptifm  doth  hft  us  under  Chrift  the  Comman- 
der, King  and  Matter  of  cheChuich.  Fcunhly,  And  therefore 
the  Church  ha  h  ever  baptized  into  the  name  of  tlie  Father  Son 
andHoiyGhoft,  withanabrenunciatioiioftht  flefh  the  world 
and  the  devil,  not  only  asopp>ifite  to  Chnlts  blood,but  asop- 
polites  to  hisKingdom  and  Doctrine.     Fifihly,  And  the  very 
water  fignifieth  the  fpirit  of  Chriit  as  well  as  hi^  blood  :  Though 
I  think  not,  as  Mr.  fJMend^  that  it  figmfiech  the  fpirit  only. 
Sixthly,  And  our  coming  from  under  the  water  was  tofignifie 
our  Refurredion  with  Chrift,  as  Rom.  6.  (hews.  So  that  it  is 
certain  that  Chrift  in  all  pares  of  his  office  is  propounded  in  bap- 
tifm to  be  the  object  of  our  faith,  and  this  baptifm  comprizing 
all  this,  is  faid  to  be  {_fcr  the  Rem'ffmn  of  fn.  ]] 

Secondly,  And  though  the  Lords  fupper  fuppofe  us  juftificd, 

yet  he  undcrftandeth  not  well  what  he  doth,  that  thinks  that 

Chrift  only  as  dying  is  there  propounded  to  our  fa^th.  For,Firft, 

In  our  very  receiving  we  profefs  Ob^-diencc  to  Chrift  as  Kir  g, 

that  hath  enjoyned  it  by  his  Law.  Secondly,  And  to  C  hrilt  ouc 

Teacher  that  hath  taught  us  thus  to  do.    Thirdly,  Thefigns 

themfelves  arc  a  vifible  word  (  of  C  hrift   our  Teacher  )  and 

teach  us  his  fufferings,  promifcs,  our  duty,  ^r.    Fourthly,  By 

i:aking,eating,and  drinking,we  renew  our  Covenant  with  Chrift; 

Ana  that  Covenant  is  made  with  him  not  only  as  Prieft,  but  as 

the  Glorified  Lord  and  Kmg  of  the  Church.    On  his  part  the 

thing  promifcd  which  the  Sacrament  fealeth,is,  (  not  that  Chrift: 

will  dye  for  us,for  thats  done  already,  but )  that  Chrift  will  adu- 

ally  pardon  us  on  the  account  of  his  merits      And  this  he  doth 

as  King:  and  that  he  will  fandifie,  prcferve,  ftrengthen,  and 

glonfie  us:   all  which  he  doth  as  King,  though  he  pur  chafed 

them  as  afacrifice.  On  our  pare  we  deliver  up  our  (elves  to  him 

to 


Cr?) 


to  be  wholly  his;  even  hisDifciplcs,  and  Subjects,  as  well  as 
pardoned  ones.  Fifthly  ,  Yea  che  very  bread  and  \wine  ea- 
ten and  drank  do  fig  iifie  our  rpiricuU  Union  andCo:nmu- 
nion  with  Jefus,  whois  pleaTed  to  become  one  with  us,  as  that 
bread  and  wine  is  one  wich  our  lubftance.  And  furely  it  is  to 
Chrift  as  our  Head  (hu  we  are  United,  and  not  only  as  dying 
for  us :  and  as  to  ourHuiband,  who  is  moft  deatjy  tobeloved 
by  us,  and  is  to  rule  us,  and  we  to  be  fubied  :o  him, being  made 
bone  of  his  bone,  and  flfftiof  hisfl.fli;  £i)he.  5.  z^.2-1-,2^  ,50. 
Sixthly,  We  are  to  do  it  as  in  remembrance  of  his  dearh,  (o  alfo 
in  expectation  of  his  commin^^  which  will  be  in  Kmgly  Olory, 
when  he  will  drink  with  us  the  fruit  of  the  Vme  new  m  che  King- 
dome  of  his  Father. 

Ob]iEi  Bur  Chrift  doth  not  pardon  fin  inall  thcferefpects. 
Anfvr.  Firft.  But  in  (he  acramert  he  is  reprelen'ed  to  be  be- 
lieved in  cn'ircly  in  all  thefe  relpects.  Sccrndlyj  And  he  par- 
doncthasKing,  thouj^h  he  merit  it  as  af^cnficc.  And  as  his 
Sacrifice  and  Mo  it  are  the  caufe  of  all  that  following,  fo  there- 
fore it  is  fpccially  rvp-reftnted  in  theSacr.imcnt,  not  excluding 
but  including  the  reft.  Thirdly,  Believing  in  Chrift  as  King 
and  Prophet,evcn  as  his  offices  refpe6  his  Honor  and  out  fdndi- 
ty,  may  be  Jstiuly  the  condition  of  our  JuiiiticatioOj  as.  belie- 
ving in  his  blood. 

Mr.  Bl  ike.  At  the  fpirit  of  Go^  guides  faith,  fo  it  wufl go 
to  Qoci  jor  prcptiHtion  and  r.ttonemtnt.  'Bat  the  H(,ly  Qhojl 
gtiidt  faith  to  (JO  to  the  blood  of  Chrifi  for  attonement^Rom.l.Z'y .  & 
5.9,  Sph.i.-J'  I  f  hK.f.j. 

Kcp\)\CoMced<}totfim:Thc  conclufion  can  be  but  th\i[_i  here  fore 
faith  mnjl  go  to  the  h/ood  of  Chrift  for  attonement  "^Whoever 
qneftioned  this  I  But  your  Thefis  which  ^oufct at  the  Head  of 
your  Arguments,  was  Q  Faith  in  {^hrij}  qua  Lord  doth  no:  j'l  fi- 
fe "]  which  is  little  kin  to  any  of  your  Arguments. 

But  in  the  explication,  you  have  here,  at  laft,the  tcrmO^^, 
and  therefore  I  may  ta^<e  that  to  be  fuppofed  in  the  Argument; 
But  then  with  that  Addition,  I  deny  you^  Minor.  The  texts 
mentioned  fay  nothing  to  prove  it. 

^om.  5.  25.  hath  no  only  in  it,  nor  any  thing  cxclufive  of  the 
other  acts  of  Chrift:  And  if  it  had,  yet  it  would  not  follow 

I  chat 


(^8) 


thatall  Other  aftsof  our  faith  were  excluded.  As  his  blco^ 
is  the  raeiitorious  caufc,  and  fo  the  foundation  of  all  the  bene- 
fit5,and  fo  all  the  Applying  Caufes  are  fuppofed  in  the  mention 
of  it  and  not  excluded  ;  fo  are  all  other  ads  of  our  faith  in  the 
mention  of  that  ad. 

Rom.  5.9.  faith  not  that  we  are  juftified  ouly  by  his  blood. 
N.risitany  adding  to  the  Scripture,  to  add  more,  unlefi  you 
can  prove  that  thff:^  texts  arc  the  whole  Scripture,  or  that  the 
other  Strip  urcs  add  no  more. 

Sf  V.  1 .  7.  and  i  John  i .  y.do  neither  of  them  exclude  either 
the  other  ads  of  Chrill,  or  other  ads  of  faith  :  Nay  f  hn  feems 
to  m  ike  fomewhat  clfe  the  condition  on  our  part,  then  the  be- 
lief in  that  blood  only ,  when  he  faith  there  [  Ifyve  rvalk.in  the 
Light  Oi  he  14  in  the  Light,  we  have  fellovfpjip  one  f*'ith  another ^ 
and  the  blood  of  fefus  (^hriji  hU  Son  cleanfeth  u*  from  all  fin  3 
Or  if  you  think  this  C »/  ]  denoteth  but  a  fign,  yet  other  texts  ' 
will  plainly  prove  more. 

To  conclude.  If  I  were  to  go  only  to  the  blood  of  Chrift  for 
atonement, yet  it  would  not  follow,  that  going  to  that  blood 
only  for  it,  is  the  onl)  act  of  Faith  on  which  Juftificationis 
promifed  or  given  me  in  the  Gofpel  ,  as  is  before  declar- 
ed. 

CAtr.  Blake.  Ton  demand,  [fVill  you  exclude  hiiOhedience^ 
RefurreBion^  Ititerceffion  ^  ?  To  rvhich  ^  only  fay,  I  marvell  At 
the  (jueflion  :  ^f  I  exclude  thefe^  I  exclude  h^  blood :  Hii  pjeddiȣ 
of  blood woi  in  Obedience,  John  10.18.  Phil,  i.^.hu  Refurre^ion 
Vpm  his  freedom  frotA  the  bands  of  death  ,  and  an  evidence  of  our 
difch^rge  by  blood:  HU  Interceffion  is  founded  on  his  blood-  He  inter  ^ 
cedes  not  as  rve  by  bare  petition,  but  by  merit  :  He  prefents  hh  blood 
4ts  the  high  Priefi  in  the  Holy  of  Holies. 

RefU  It  was  the  thing  I  had  to  do,  to  prove  that /Jew.  3. 
24.  and  thofe  other  texts,  arc  not  cxclufive  of  all  but  his  blood, 
and  that  the  word  Only  is  no  more  meant,  then  it  is  cxpreffed  in 
them.  A  nd  now  you  grant  it  me :  And  needs  muft  do  it,  while 
Scripture  tells  us,  that  by  the  Obeciience  of  o«r,  many  are  made 
Righteous  J  Rom.  5.19.  and  that  he  is  Rifenfor  our  Jufiificatiott, 
Rom.  4.25.  and  that  Righteoufnefs /ball  be  imputed  to  w>^  if  we 
believton  himthatraifedup  fefw  our  Lord  from  the  eiead.'vsr.i^. 

and 


and  It  u  Cjod  that  jn/flfieth  :  who  u  he  thAt  condimntth  ?  it  u 
Chrifl  that  dyei^  yen,  rathtr  that  is  rifen  again  ,  who  is  even  at  the 
right  hand  cf  §od;  wko  alfo  m^keth  Intercejfion  for  us,  Rom.^ 
3^,34.  hcthat  bclieveth  all  thcfe  texts  will  not  add  o»lj  to  the 
firft,aclcaft  if  heundcrftandthcmi  for  they  do  not  contradift 
each  other.  Well  !  but  you  msrvell  at  my  qucftion  I  I  am  glad 
of  that  1  Are  we  To  well  agreed,  that  you  marvell  at  my  iup- 
pofition  of  this  difference  ?  To  fatisfie  you,  my  queftion  im- 
plycdthis  Argument.  If  the  Refurrcdion,  Interceffion,  e^r. 
be  not  in  thole  texts  excluded,  nor  faith  in  them,  then  wc  may 
not  add  erti'y  to  interpret  them  ^  but  d*<:.Ergo. 

Bur  let  us  hear  the  reafons  of  your  marveling.  Firft,  As  to 
Obedience,  you  hy  Hii  /heddiug  of  blvod^as  in  Obedience.  An- 
fwer.  But  though  all  blood-(hed  was  in  Obedience,  yet  all 
Obedience  was  not  by  blood-fhed,  nor  fuffering  neither.  And 
the  text  Rom.  5.19  Teems  to  fpeak  of  Obedience  as  O  bcdience, 
and  not  only  as  in  blood  (lied. 

Secondly, You  fay  Hm  RefHrreHionwat  his  freedom  ^8cc.  Anf, 
But  Suffering  is  one  thing.and  freedom  from  fuffering  is  another 
thing,  i  herefore  faith  to  our  jui^ification  muft  eye  Chri  fts  con- 
queft  and  freedom  from  death  as  well  as  his  death  it  felf.  Moreo- 
ver, Refurredion  was  an  act  of  Power,  and  his  Entrance  on 
his  Kingdora,and  not  a  mcer  act  of  Pricfthood :  Nor  will  you 
ever  prove  that  faith  (  to  Juftification  )  muft  only  look  at  the 
Refurrection  as  connoting  the  death  from  which  he  rifeth. 

Thirdly,  You  fay  ,  Bu  Intercejfion  is  founded  on  hiihlood,hLC. 
^tif^tr.  So  is  his  Kingdom  and  Lordfliip,  Rom.i^  9.  Mat. 
28.i8r  T'W.  2.9,10.  It  feems  then  faith  in  order  to  Juftification 
mufl  ndfc  only  look  at  Chrifts  blood.but  that  which  is  founded  on 
it.  His  Government,  inLegiflation ,  Ju^dgement  ,  Execution, 
is  all  founded  in  his  blood.  &c,  becauf*;  he  hath  drank  of  the 
brool^  in  the  ^aj>  ,  therefore  did  he  lift  up  the  Head ,  Pfalme 
1 10.  7. 

You  add  He  Interceeds  by  Merit.  Anfwer.  Not  by  new 
pnrchafing  Merit,  but  by  the  virtue  of  his  former  Merit,  and 
the  collation  of  the  effects  of  it  from  the  Father.  And  fo  he 
Rcigneth  andGovernethbothby  virtue  of  former  Merit,  and 
for  the  applying  that  Merit  and  attaining  of  its  Ends. 

1 2  Whereas 


C^o) 


whereas  therefore  you  fay  If  I  fxcludethefe^I/haHtxc/Mile 
hu  blood  J  1 1  is  a  weighty  Anfwcr.  And  the  l.ke  you  may  fay  alfo 
of  his  Kingly  and  Piophctical  oificc.    The  operation  of  them 
are  fo  woven  and  twilled  together  by  infinite  wifdom,  that  all  do 
harmonioufly  concur  to  the  attainment  of  the  ends  of  each  one; 
and  if  you  lay  by  one,  )  ou  lay  by   all ;  you  exclude  Chrifts 
blood  as  to  the  end  of  Juftification,  if  you  include  not  his 
Kingly  and  Prophetical  offices,    and  look  not  to  him  as  making 
the  Co  cnant  or  Grant  ol  pardon  in  his  blood;  and  as  teach- 
ing and  perfwading  and  working  us  into  Union  with  himfelf  that 
we  may  have  part  in  his  blood;  and  as  conferring  daily  the 
fruits  of  his  blood  as  King,  in  Renewed  pardon  of.daily  fins^ 
and  as  juftifying  us  at  Judgement   as  King  and  Judge.     His 
blood  is  a  Foundation  without  a  building,if  you  take  it  without 
allthcfe  :    Overlook  thefe,  and  you  deny  it  as  well  as  by  over- 
looking his  Refurrcftion. 

Befides,  Stjfton  at  Gods  Right  Hand  Vih'xch.  is  one  thing  that 
the  Apo[ileinftancethin,/ii7W4«/  8.  35.  is  his  Glorifica  ion  it 

felf 

And  when  you  fay  [_  He  prefents  hit  blood  as  High  Prief}^ 
&c.  ]  I  anfwer.  But  not  as  a  renewed  facrificc  ;  prefenting  it 
is  not  (bedding  it,or  offering  it  in  facrifice.  And  the  prefentation 
is  not  a  minding  God  of  what  he  knows  not.or  hath  forgot,or  an 
arguing  with  h;m  to  extort  his  Mercy  ^  but  as  the  value  and  me- 
rit of  Clirifts  facrifice  hath  its  continual  Being  before  God,  fo 
Chrill  doth  give  out  all  his  bcnefis  to  his  Church  as  procured 
and  received  from  the  Father  by  the  merit  of  his  facrifice  :  and 
this  is  his  Interceflion.  But  your  arguing  yieldeth,  tha,fio  Ju- 
ftification, we  muft  not  only  believe  in  Chrift  as  (heddinq  his 
blood  for  us  on  earth,  but  alfo  on  Chrift  as  prefcnting  his  blood 
for  us  in  heaven ;  which  is  enough  to  my  ends. 

ijllr.  Blske.  Tcti  tell  me [urthtr  that  the  thing  I hadto  frove 
was  not  the  exclufton  of  faith  in  hU  commanit^  bttt  of  faith  i.t  (^hrifi 
at  Lord  and  Teacher.  I  can  no  more  difiinguipj  Lord  and  Com- 
wand  than  1  can  'Blood  and  Sacr  fice  j  it  being  the  office  of  a  Lord 
to  Rnle,  ai  of  blood  to  make  atoneme:  t. 

Repl,  Fit  ft ,  If  you  cannot  diflinguifh,  there's  110  remedy 
butyoumuftcrr  byconfufion.  its  obvious  toan  ordinary  un- 

derftanding 


(6  1) 

dcrftanding  that  even  Blood  and  S-icrfi:em^y  as  weHbediflin" 
guidied  as  Ea>'ih  and  Ma»y  or  Ink^and  (Vnting  \  \_  Blood  J  llgni- 
fyingonly  tbe  matter,  yea  but  part  of  the  marcer  j  anJ  {_  a 
Sacri'ice']  fignifying  that  matter  With  irs  moral  Forrn. 
Secondly ,And  its  as  obvious  that  Lor^  and  Ctfr.m^nd  do  ochcr- 
wife  differ  then  BUoddin^Sacr  ficti^ot  Lord^^s  it  fignt.itch  princi- 
pally a  Proprietary's  toto  c^th  diftinA  fr<.m  command, as  ftanding 
in  anotheryirnri  •.  And  Lord  us  it  (iirnifieth  a  Kedor,c!oth  d'fCcr 
from  Command,  as  the  efficient  from  the  eff;.d  ;  which  is  other- 
wife  tht'n  as  part  of  the  matter  doth  from  the  whole  informed. 

It  is  no  Argument  againft  the  truth  which  I  maintain,  that 
you  cannot  dirtmgu'ifh  thefc. 

Thirdly,  If  it  be  the  office  of  a  Lord  to  Rule  ;  then  you  may 
well  diftinguifh  betwen  the  office  and  the  work  :  But  indeed  in 
the  f.r.t  fenfe  Lord  fignifieth  a  Proprietary,  and  but  in  che  fe- 
cond,  a  Rulers  Power ;  which  is  not  alwayes  properly  called  an 
Office  neither  j  no  more  then  the  Soveraign  is  properly  an  Offi- 
cer. 

Fourthly,  To  make  ^^tonemcKt  is  not  all  one  as  to  h  a  Sacri- 
fice^ which  was  your  former  term :  for  Atonement  is  the  effect: 
of  a  Sacrifice  ■  not  of  blood  as  blood,  but  as  a  Sacrifice  meri- 
torious and  accepted. 

Fifthly,  And  as  to  the  point  in  difference  between  us, the  diflFe- 
rcnce  is  palpable  and  weighty  between  believing  in  Chrift  as 
King,  and  believing  or  obeying  his  Commands.  As  his  King- 
ly Power  belongs  to  the  O»/?!'/if(0«  of  his  myfticalbody  or  Re- 
publike,  and  his  commands  that  flow  from  it  to  the  Adnth  i(}ra~ 
tion  :  fo  Subjedion  to  his  Power  and  Relation,  and  confcnt- 
ing  to  this  conftiturion  do  enter  us  into  the  nody  and  unite  us  to 
him  :  wht'n  believing  and  obe;  ing  hi>  Latp^  for  Admir,i^ration^ 
do  follow  as  the  fruits.  If  you  could  have  diftinguiflicd  between 
the  Root  and  Fruits ,  between  Faith  and  Obedience,  between 
making  Difcip'es^a  'd  teaching  to  ohferve,S>LC.  Mat.  28. 1 9. 2  ~.  or 
if  coming  T)tfc:p/es^  and  Learmng ;  you  might  have  dillinguiftied 
between  becoming  a  SubjeH  2ind  okej/ing.  And  what  ever  you 
do,  1  am  furc  others  of  your  wAy  do  grant  ,  that  Receiving 
ChriJ}  as  Lord  and  Teacher y  is  the  faith  that  juftifieth,  though 
not  f  »*i  talu^  but  they  will  not  fay  fo  by  receiving  or  obeying  his 

1 3  ^ovtrninl^ 


Govermng  Laws,   which  arediftincc  from  the  conftitution  or 
fundamental  Law. 

Mr.  Blake.  Touytt  tell  me  it  vpm  fittefl  for  Paul  tofay^hyfditk 
in  hia  tlood  •,  becaufe  he  intends  to  connote  both  ^hut  we  are  jf^ft-fi' 
edby  ex  parte  Chrifti.-W  "Of  hut  ft?^  are  jujiified  by  ex  parte  noftri ; 
but  the  former  prtncipull^.  Toth^i^Jay,  If  this  rvere  fir tt^  for 
Paul,  then  ii  u  nnftfor  any  to  come  in  with  Animiadver/ionf  ^  and 
tell iu  of  ^ny  other  thtngzx  parte  ChriftI,  or  ex  parte  noftri/or 
fuJ}fi:ation.  J  pray  j oh  reft  here  <*«  i  ^e  are  well  agreed.  Her  e  id 
Chrjis  Priefily  Office  on  hu  part  alone,  andl^m  refolved  to  lool^no 
further. 

Tijpl.  Though  I  may  not  hope  to  change  you,  if  you  are 
Refolved,  yet  I  may  take  leave  to  render  a  reafon  of  my  con- 
trary as  perempto'-y  Refolution  :  I  am  refolvtd  to  look  further 
ex  parte  Ch>ijii^  then  to  his  blond,  yea  or  his  whole  Merit .  yea 
or  whole  Prieft-hood  for  my  Juftification;  even  to  whole  Chrlft, 
and  in  fpecial  to  his  Regal  conftitution  and  fentence.  Yet  J  reft 
where  you  defire  me,  as  to  the  Truth  of  what!  faid;andif  we 
are  agreed,  its  better  then  I  can  perceive  in  your  other  words. 
Firft,  Though  Paul  there  mention  the  Priejlly  office  aloxe,  yec 
that's  not  all  his  Epiftles,nor  all  the  Scriptures^nor  doth  he  here 
exclude  the  reft. 

Secondly, It  may  be  fitteft  to  Pauls  defign  in  that  particular  dif- 
courfe  tomenuon  faith  i»  hii  blood,  and  yet  it  mjy  be  fit  for 
another  to  come  in  with  animadverfions,  and  tell  you  of  more 
ncceffary  both  ex  parte  Chrifii  &  nojlri.  Its  common  to  cxprefs 
cur  meaning  of  a  whole  in  a  fummary  notion  taken  from  a  chief 
part:  And  indeed  in  Political  difcourfes  it  is  hard  to  meet  with 
a  fitter  way  oi'  expreffion. 

Thirdly,  Paul  himfelf was  not  of  your  opinion,  nor  Chrifl: 
reither.and  yet  it  was  not  unfit  for  them  to  difcover  it.The  fame 
F<^ul  that  here  thought  it  fitteft  to  mention  faith  in  his  bloody  did 
elfewhcre  think  ic  fit  to  mention  Juftification  b)  hu  Obedi(nce,ind 
that  he  llofe  again  for  our  jujlificitisn  j  and  to  promife  Jmputa- 
tion  of  Righteoufncfs  to  us,  if  Mice  believe  on  him  that  raif' 
ed  upfefw  our  Lord  from  thedeai,  Rom.  4.24,  25.  with  the 
like  paffages  before  mentioned.  Cut  moft  frequently  it  is  the 
comprehcnfive  phrafe  of  [  believingin  Chrifi  Jefut  our  Lord} 

thac 


that  he  ufeth.The  fame  Chrift  thatcalleth  bimfelf  fo  ofs  the  Lord 
and  Matter  of  his  followers,  excludeth  not  thereby  his  other 
Rdacions  •  And  when  he  faith  in  one  place  Q  I  am  the  Vine'] 
he  may  freely  fay  elfe  wherc,[^  ^  am  thegoo^i SheploerJ:  ]  And  he 
that  fpeakcth  oUxymg  h'^n  his  life  for  the  [hit f^  doth  not  there- 
by make  it  unfit  to  mention  other  Paftoral  acts  for  them.    And 
^^l^2XX.^\i\i%  o'i  eaUnghi4f.tP]  ani drinking  his  bloody  mtended 
not  ihecxclufionof  zhe  fptrit  th^t  tjiiicl^eth.     lam  therefore 
Refoived  by  his  Grace  to  adhere  to  whole  Chrift  as  the  obje(3 
of  that  faith  which  is  the  Condition  of  Juftification.     And  I 
think  this  full  comprehcnfive  faith  isfaferthen  the  groundlefly 
diftinguidiing  faith;  and  this  Dodrine  more  agreeable  to  the 
Scriptures. 

Mr.  BUke.  Fourthly,  Ourfaiih  muji  Uok^on  (^hrifl'foa^  to 
obtain  right toufnefs  bj  him^  b)  virtue  of  which  ^e  may  appear  be- 
fore God  Oi  righteous  :  Bnt  it  ii  by  his  Obedience  as  a  fervant  that 
V^e  obtainrighteoHfnefs^andjiand before  God  as  righteous^  Rom.  5. 
\g.  by  the  obedience  of  one  many  are  made  righteous. 

Repi.  Firft, Igrant  the  whole:  but  its  nothing  to  our  Que- 
ftion.  Its  a  ftrange  error  that  runs  through  fo  many  Arguments, 
that  they  (hould  be  impertinent  to  the  queftion.  You  fhould 
have  concluded  that ;  Faith  in  Chrifi  qua  Lordjoth  notjuflifie  ] 
which  in  termini^  is  the  conclufion  that  you  undertook  to  prove: 
whereas  all  that  this  Argument  will  conclude,  is,  that  []  our  faith 
mtifi  hok^at  Chrifi s  obedience  for  Ryghteoufnefs^  &c.  ]  which  I 
have  faid  no  more  againtt  then  you  have  done. 

Secondly,  But  if  [_  Only  ']  be  implyed  as  adjoyned  to  [  ebedi- 
f««  then  it  will  exclude  his  fuffering  as  fuffcring  in  that  formal 
refpeiJ^,  and  take  it  in  only  as  the  Matter  of  his  Obedience. 

Thirdly,  And  by  this  Argument  you  deftroy  what  you  not 
only  mantained,  but  refoived  to  ftick  to  in  the  laft  ,  that  is, 
that  it  is  not  fit  for  any  one  to  tell  us  of  any  other  thing  then 
faith  in  his  blood  for  juftification,  and  that  you  are  refoived  to 
look  no  further  then  Chrifts  Prieftly  office  alone.  For  Obedience  ' 
extendeth  further  then  blood- (bed:  therefore  if  we  are  juftified 
by  Chrifts  whole  obedience,  then  by  more  then  his  blood.  Yea 
you  will  be  put  hard  to  it  to  prove,  that  all  Chrifts  obedience 
was  offered  by  him  as  aPreift  co  his  Father:  Ic  belongs  to  a 

Subjcd, 


(^+) 


SuVjfft  .  a  Servant,  a  Son  to  obey;  but  obedicrtc€  is  far  from 
being  proper  to  a  Prieft. 

Fourthly,  If  you  intend  the  Major  exdufively  as  to  all  other 
confiderations  of  the  objed,  Iftilid::ny  itasfalfc  Our  faith 
(even  as  the  condition  of  Jurtincacion  )  muft  look  at  Chr(ft, 
Kot  or)!j  to  obtain  Righteouf  lefs  by  him  ,  but  al(o  to  fubfeft 
ourfelves  to  his  fcjching  and  Government, and  to  glorifie  him 
in  and  for  his  Mercy. 

Fifthly^  Yea,  the  Minor  it  Telfis  falfe,  if  you  imply  theex- 
clufive  0>tly.  For  we  obtain  Ki^i^heoufncfs  and  are  Juftified 
before  Cod  effectively  by  Chnlt  as  King  firft  by  conttitution, 
and  fecondly^  bv  fentence,  as  well  as  mentor  ioufly  by  Chrift  as 
Prieft. 

Mr.  ?yU\ie.Fift hlyyTljnt  wav  that  Chrijl  tool^  to  hrlrg  us  to  Goi^ 
cur f Pitt b  mu(i  eye  amifullovt :  Bat  Chrifl  by  de*th  the  S*crtfice  of 
ofhmfelfbri-gu-s  to  C/od^lPe'.'^.iS.ChriJi  a/fohath  once  jujfer- 
ed  for  fins,th^  j  -ftfo^  the  uy>ju{l,8cc, 

Repl.  Still  the  lame  error  ;  an  Ignoratia  Elenchi.  I  grant  the 
whole,  but  the  concluHon's  wanting.  Did  lever  deny  that/l<ir/^ 
njtijl  (ye  andfoUfOf  Chrifls  death  to  bring  us  to  God  ?  yea  for  Jufti- 
jfication.  But  you  (hould  have  faid  [by  his  de.^th  ^lo-e  '  or  you  fay 
nothing.  And  when  you  prove  chcU  by  his  death  alone  Chrift 
brings  usto'^^od,  you  willdofome.vhat.And  yetif  youdid,  it 
would  not  follow  that  we  are  brought  to  God  in  Juttification 
only  by  eying  the  caufe  of  Juftification  a^  fuch. 

A-ir>  BUkt-Sixthlyt  At  Chriji  freeth  usfrfm  the  curfeyfo  he  jit" 

ftifie '  usandi'  that  notion  our  faith  muji  look  to  him  for  JufiijicA- 

.   t'ton.      Thii  ^  pi  din  •,  fuJJification  being  no  other  but  ottr  acejHittal 

from  thec(4yfe,  tvkich  u  thi  fentence  of  the  Law  of  Mofes,/^^.  1 3. 

%,bHt  Chrtfifrteth  us  from  the  caufe  infnffering  'ts  a  Sacrifice^mt 

ruiing  as  aLord  f  Gal.  3.  13.  Chrifl  hath  Redeemed  us  ^icc. 

Repl.  ¥\\^.\j)nly  ~\  is  again  left  out  in  the  Major  propofition, 
and  fo  I  grant  it :  But  if  it  be  implyed  thac  faith  mufi  look  to 
htmf'r  Ju(lification  only  in  that  notion  ns  he  j(t(iifiethus^  yea  only 
at  henieritetbjufliflcatlon,  then  I  deny  it,  and  you  fay  nothing 
to  ptove  it.  Secondly,  The  exclufive  of  your  Minor  is  a  dange- 
rous error ;  C  hrift  frceth  us  from  the  curfe  by  j  uftifying  us  as  a 
King,  and  teaching,  and  ruling, and  fanftifying  us  j  and  not  only 

by 


C<J5) 


by  becoming  a  curfc  for  us ;  For  if  yol>  here  put  in  [^  0»/y  f6n 
plainly  exclude  all  his  Obedience  as  fiicb,  and  much  of  it  mate- 
rially  ;  for  it  is  not  a  c^r/i?^  thing  to  obey  God.  TheLawcurf- 
eth  for  difobeying :  therefore  Obeying  is  not  the  Curfe,  nor  is  it 
materially  a  Curfe  to  Love  God,  and  Tiuft  him,and  be  zealous 
for  his  Glory,  c^r.  The  whole  office  of  Ch rift  isimployed  in 
freeing  us  from  [he  Curfe  :  and  when  Paul  faith,  he  was  made  a 
Curfe  to  free  us,  he  never  faid  or  thought  thathedid  nothing 
-elk  to  free  us,  for  an  hundred  tcxrs  do  tell  us  of  more. 

Thirdly,  And  on  the  by  I  muft  fay,  that  I  am  not  of  your  mind 
inthc  defcriptionof  Juftification  ;  for,  omitting  the  conrrover- 
'fic  whether  Juliificarion  only  free  us  from  [he  Curfe,  I  do  not 
believe  that  this  curfc  is  only  the  fcntcnce  of  the  Law  of  Mofes. 
If  it  were,  either  you  muft  prove  that  all  the  Gentile  world  that 
heard  not  of  it  was  under  the  Law  o^ Mofes  (  which  abundance 
of  moft  Learned  men  deny  with  better  grounds  then  you  have  to 
affirm  it  )  or  elfe  that  all  thefc  are  under  no  curfe  for  Juftificati- 
onto  remove.  The  Law  of  Nature  was  materially  pare  of  the 
Mofaica?  Law;  but  the  form  denominateth. 

So  much  to  Mr.  Blak^es  Arguments,  which  are  fo  little  to  the 
purpofe,  that  if  the  weight  of  thecaufe,  and  the  prejudice  of 
fome  Readers  did  not  call  moreearneftly  for  a  Reply,  then  any 
appcranceofrtrength  inthem,!  hadfparedmy  felfand  the  Rea- 
der this  Labor.But  that[  ChrijioiChri^  « the  obynofthatfaitk 
hj  rvtoich  as  a  C'^neiition  ^e  mujl  bejuflflei^'  and  fo  that  rveare  not 
^ujiif'd  only  by  believiyi£  in  hid  bloody  bftt  alfo  bj  belttvin^  in  Joins 
enti-^elj  as  Jefus  Chrifl  our  Lord,  and  bj  becoming  h's  Difiipks^ 
or  true  Chrijiians^]  this  is  a  truth ,  that  dcferveth  more  then 
tny  Pen  to  defend  it;  and  that  while  God  affordech  me  time  andl 
ftrength,  I  (hall  never  defert. 


2S[oa;.    1 6')  6.  K 


DIS  P  VTATION 

OF 

fVSTIFIC^TIO:AQ, 

JJ^hether  any  Worlds  beany  Conditions 
of  it  ^ 


Conteining  a  neceffary  Defence  of  ancient  Verity  , 
againfl  the  annecefjary  Oppofttion  of  a  (very 
Learned ,  ^e^verend  ,  and  dearly  fBelofved 
brother  ,  in  his  Treati/e  of  Imptitation  of 
Kighteoujnejs^  and  his  Lectures  on  John  xy. 


By  ^chard  ^axter\ 


LONDO  2^, 

Printed  by  Rohtt  ivhhe-,  for  Ntvil  Simntt»i\  Book-fcllei: 
in  Kederminficr^     1657, 


(.69) 


Whether    Worlds    are  a  Condition  of 
fujlijication  C  (^nd  fo  v^hether  vpe 
arejufiijied  by  Works  as  fuch  a  Con^ 
dition  C 


Hough  we  have  faid  enough  already  on  thcfe 
Queltions  (  which  for  dilpatchi  joyn  toge- 
ther, )  yet  feeing  there  are  feme  that  mud 
needs  have  more,  or  the  fame  again;  I  (hall 
yield  fo  far  to  their  Importunity ,  as  to  recite 
here  briefly  the  ftate  of  the  Conttoverrie,and 
fome   of  that  evidence  which  is   clfcwhcrc 


spore  largely  produced  for.  the  truth. 

And  Firft,  We  muft  explain  what  is  meant  by  fP'erJ^t,  and 
what  is  mcanr  by  ^ufiHcation  ;  what  by  a  ^  Condition'^  and  what 
by  thePrepofirion  hj  here,  when  we  fpeakof  Juftification  ^jr 
works  .*  And  then  we  (hall  lay  down  the  truth  in  feveral  pr^o- 
fuions.  Negative  and  Affirmative. 

It  feems  ftrangc  to  me  to  hear  men  on  either  fide  to  fpeak 

K  3  :  againft 


\ 


(70) 

agtinftthe  iMfgaciveor  Affirmative  of  the  Queftion,  and  re- 
proach fo  bitterly  chofe  that  maintain  them,  without  any  diftin" 
dion  or  explication  J  as  if  either  the  error  lay  in  the  terms,  or 
the  terms  were  fo  plain  and  univocal,  that  the  Propofitions  arc 
true  only  on  one  part,what  fenfe  foever  they  be  taken  in.  No 
doubt  but  hefaiihtrue,  that  faith  that  Works  are  the  Condi- 
tion of  Juftihcation:  and  hefaithastrue.that  faith  they  are  not, 
if  they  take  the  terms  in  fuch  different  fenfes  as  commonly  Dif- 
puters  on  thefe  Queftions  do  cake  them.  And  its  paft  all  doubt 
that  ^a  man  iijujiifie^bj  faiihrvithont  thewerkj  of  the  Lx^  ; 
and  cbat-/>  u  not  of  fVorks,  but  of  Grace :  and  its  as  certain  that 
{a  man  u  jufiiped  h  r»orkj  aKdmt  h)  faith  only;  and  that  by  thetr 
fVords  menjhall  hejujii^ed,  and  by  their  Words  thfy  fjall  be  con- 
demned. ~]  Gods  word  were  not  true ,  if  both  thefe  were 
not  true. 

We  muft   therefore  neccfTarily  diftinguifh  :    And  firft  of 
Work?. 

Firft,  Sometime:  the  term,  ivorki  »s  taken  for  that  (in  general; 
which  makes  the  Re'i'pard  to  be  not  of  grace  but  of  Debt :  Meri- 
torious works :  Or  for  fuch  as  are  conceited  to  be  thus  merito- 
rious, though  they  be  not.  And  thofeare  materially,  either 
Works  of  perfea  obedience  ^ithcut  ftn^  (  fuch  as  riy^ dam  had  be- 
fore his  fall,  and  Chrift  had,  and  the  good  Angels  have,)  or  clfc 
fVorkj  of  obedience  to  the  CMofaical  Ln'iv  ,  which  fuppofed  iin, 
and  were  ufed  in  order  to  pardon  and  life,  but  miftakingly 
by  the  blind  Unbelievers,  as  fuppofing  that  the  dignity  of  the 
Law  did  put  fuch  a  dignity  on  their  obedience  thereto,  as  that  ic 
would  ferve  to  life  without  the  fatisfadion  and  merit  of  Chrift, 
or  at  leaft  muft  concur  in  Co  ordination  therewith.  Or  elfe 
laftly,  they  are  Gofpel  duties,  thus  conceited  meritorious. 
.  Secondly,  Cut  fometiroe  the  word  iVorkj  is  taken  for  that 
which  ftandeth  in  a  due  fubordination  to  grace :  and  that  firft, 
moft  generally,  for  a»j  moral  lirtuous  ^Qions,  and  fo  even 
faith  it  k\l  is  comprehended , and  even  the  very  Receptive  or  fi- 
duciallaa  of  faith:  or  lefs  generally, for  external  ads  of  obf- 
dience,  as  diftind  from  internal  habitual  Grace.and  fo  Repen- 
tance, Faiih,  Love,  e^£-.  are  not  Works;  or  for  all  ads  ex- 
ternal and  internal;  except  faith  it  felf.     And  fo  Repentance, 

Defirc 


(70 


Defire  after  Chrift,  T-ove  to  him,  denying  our  own  Righteouf- 
ners,diftruft  in  our  felveSje^-c.  arc  called  Works^  Or  eife  for 
ail  Ads  external  and  internal  befides  chc  Reception  of  Chrifls 
Righreoufnefsto  Juftification  :  And  fo  the  belief  of  the  CJof- 
pel,  the  Acceptance  of  Chrift  as  our  Prophet  and  Lord  by  the 
Title  of  Redemption,withmany  other  afts  of  fai;h  in  Chrift, 
are  called  works :  befides  the  difchiming  of  our  own  Righte- 
ournefs,and  the  reft  before  mentioned. 

Secondly, As  for  the  word  JufiificAtijn^M  is  (o  variouQy  taken 
by  Divines,  and  in  common  ufe,  that  it  would  require  more 
words  then  I  (hall  fpend  on  this  whole  Difpute,  to  name  and 
open  its  feveral  fenfcs-,  and  therefore  (  having  elfewherc  given  a 
brief  fcbem  of  them  )  I  fhall  now  only  mention  thefe  few  which 
are  moft  pertinent  to  our  purpofc.  Firft,  Some  take  fufiifica- 
//o«  for  fome  Immanent  Acts  of  God,and  fomefor  franfient. 
And  of  the  former  fome  take  it  for  Gods  eternal  Decree 
to  juftiRe,  which  neither  Scripture  calleth  b^  this  name,  nor 
will  Reafon  allow  us  to  doit,  but  improperly.  Sometime  its 
taken  for  Gods  Immanent  prefcnt  Approbation  of  a  man,  and 
Reputing  him  to  be  juft  ,  when  he  is  firft  fo  conftituted.  And 
this  fome  few  call  a  Tranfient  Aft,  becaufe  the  Objcd  is  extrin- 
fick :  But  moft  call  it  Immanent,  becaufe  it  makes  no  Alterati- 
on on  that  objed'.  And  fome  plead  that  this  is  an  eternal  a(^ 
without  beginning,  becaufe  it  is  Godseflence  which  is  eternal ; 
and  thefe  denominate  the  Ad  from  the  fubftance  or  Agent;  And 
other  fay,  that  it  begins  in  time,  becaufe  Gods  EfTencedoth 
then  begin  to  have  that  Refped  to  a  finner  which  makes  it  capa- 
ble of  fuch  a  denomination  :  And  fo  thefe  fpeak  of  the  Ad  de- 
nominatively, formally,  refpcctively  :  Both  of  them  fpeak  true 
but  both  fpeak  not  the  fame  truth.  ; 

Sometime  the  word  fuflificationx^  taken  for  a  tranfient  Ad- 
of  Godthatmaketh  orconduccthto  a  change  upon  the  cxtrin- 
fick  object.  And  fo  firft,  Its  fometime  taken  by  fome  Divines, 
for  a  Conditional  Juftification,  which  is  but  an  ad  that  hath  a 
tendency  to  that  change  ;  and  this  is  not  actual  Juftilication. 
Secondly,  Sometime  it  is  taken  foractualjuftification, and  that 
is  rh'^cefold.  Firft,  Conftitutive  .•  Secondly,  Sentential :  thirdly, 
executive.  Firft,  Conftitutive  Juftificacion,  is  firft  either  in  the 

qualities 


C72^) 


qualities  of  the  foul.by  inherent  holynefs ;  which  is  firft  perfcft, 
fuch  Adam  (once  )  and  the  Angels, and  Chir ft  had  j  rccondly,or 
ImperfeiS,  fuch  as  the  fandified  here  have.  Secondly,  Or  its 
in  our  Relations :  when  we  are  pardoned  and  receive  our  Right 
to  Glory:  This  is  an  aAof  God  in  Chrift  by  che  free  Gift 
of  the  Gofpel,  or  Law  of  Grace  :  and  ic  is  firft,  The  firft  put- 
ting afinner  into  a  ftateof  Righteoufnef^ ,  out  of  a  ftate  of 
Guilt.       Secondly   ,    Or  it  is   the  continuing  him  in   that 
ftate,and  the  renewing  of  particular  pardon  upon  particular  fins. 
Secondly,  Sentential  pardon  or  Juftification,  i%  firft,  by  that 
Manifeftation  which  God  makes  before  the  Angels   in  heaven. 
Secondly,  at  the  day  of  Judgement  before  all  the  world .  Third- 
ly, Executive  Juftification,  x//?i.  the  execution  of  the  aforefaid 
fentcnce,(lefs  properly  called  Juftification,  and  more  properly 
called  pardon  j  confifteih  in  taking  off  the  punifhment  inflicted, 
and  forbearing  the  puniftiment  deferved,  and  giving  poffefllion 
of  the  bappinefs  adjudged  us  '■  fothatit  is  partly  in  this  life, 
viz..  in  giving  thefpirit,  and  outward  mercies,  and  freeing  us 
from  judgements  (  And  thus  fanctification  it  felf  is  a  part  of 
Juftification  j  and  partly  in  the  life  to  come,  in  freeing  us  from 
Hell,  and  poffefling  us  of  Glory. 

Thirdly,  As  for  the  word  Condition^  the  Etymologifts  will  tell 
^us,  that  it  firft  fi'gnifieth  t^Eiionem  condtmii :  and  then,  *PaJj7- 
ontm^qtta  (juidconditur^  and  then  efttalitatem  infant  per  <juam  coti' 
.dere  alt^uiit  vtl  condi  aliejuid  poteji\  ^  hinc  eji  fro  ftntn  qHifu- 
Htu  efi  rem  condendo  ;  ^  deitjceps  prj  owni  flsttUy  <fuem  ferfotm 
vel  res  aut  caufa  cjuofuo  modo  hahet  ant  accipit.  But  we  have 
nothing  to  do  with  it  in  fuch  large  deceptions,  in  which  all  things 
in  the  world  may  be  called  Conditions  Vid.  Martin,  in  Norn, 
They  come  nearer  our  ufe  of  the  word,  when  they  expound  it 
Iby,  CModeratio^Circumfcriftio,  determinatiojimitatto. 

In  Naturals  the  word  Condition  is  oft  ufcd  pro  ratione  formally 
per  ijHam  altcuJM  difciplina [uh'jeEium  ada<^uatii  condituifolet.  As 
•€.  g.PhjJiCUJCoi^/Jfder At  corpus^  CHmconditione  mobilitatis^  GeO' 
meter  tonjiderat  ^ttantitatem  cum  conditione  continuitatia,  j^rith- 
mtticus  cum  conditione  disiun[iionu'^  ^^Medicus  conjiderat  hamaifi 
corpus  cum  conditior.e^  fiil.^UAtntus  ttgrotare  (^  fanari  potefl. 
iSometime  alfo  any  quality,  or  action,  which  isjinefuanen  to  an 

■€ffcCC 


C73) 


effict  or  event  is  in  mcer  Naturah  called  a  Co^iitioi  ;^;  the 
drynefs  of  the  wood,  and  the  approximation  of  it  to  the  fire. 
<^e.  are  conditions  of  its  burning:    the  non  impedicion  of  a 
more  powerful  Agent,  is  a  Condition  of  the  efficacious  action 
of  every  lower  caufCjC^c. 

Many  other  acceptions  of  the  word  in  Phyficks  by  Z^i^^r^/, 
Clatiiitii  AlbertHs  aid  others ;  you  may  fee  in  Gocltnii,  Lexic, 
Philofopb.  in  nom.  conditio.  But  we  are  not  in  a  Phyfical,  but 
amoral  difcourfe,  and  cherforemuft  be  underftood  according  to 
the  fubjecc  matter.  It  istherfore  a  Civil  or  Legal  Condition 
thatwc  have  CO  enquire  ^/rr*-,  and  muft  fetch  our  defcripcions 
from  Lawyers,  and  not  from  Phyficks,  and  therefore  it  is  but  de- 
ce.tful  equivocation  in  fome  Opponencs^co  fetch  the  r  oppofition 
from  Phyfical  inflances. 

The  Lawyers  give  us  divers  Definitions  of  Condition,  but  for 
the  moft  part  they  come  all  to  one  in  fenfe,  Some  fay, conditio  efi 
Lex  adpojitA  hominum  actionibHS  ^  em  fuffendens ,  Prat.  Condi- 
tio  {  lay  others  )  eji  mod- s  ejni  fttfpendit  a^um,  clonic  eo  ex'fler.tt 
confirmetHr.  Vult.  in  Injfit.  de  k^re.  infiit,.  ^  .3.  n.  6.  Accurfus 
faith,   Conditio  eflfufpenfio^cuJHs  defut^iro  tffeUtu  vel  confirma- 
tio pendet :     Bart.  Conditio  ejifftturuj  evtntuf,  inijHemdiffoJitio 
fftfpenditftr.     Cuiacius,  (^oieditio  efi  Lex  dtddita  negotio^  ejua  do- 
nee prafletur  eventumffffpendit.Theic  are  of  conditions  t/f/»r«r<7: 
But  thofe  that  arc  deprafenti  vel  Jle  pr£terito^([i(pend  not  the 
obligation,  unkfs  as  they  are  yet  futurx  ^uoad  cogniiwem^ 
though  not<}uoadep,ind  f J  the  knowledge  of  a  Right  maybe 
fufpended.  They  are  commonly  divided  into  C^/»<?/^^  Potejia- 
tivas,  c^  mixtoi.    The  moral  operation  of  Conditions  as  fucb, 
is  not  in  caufing  the  effect  when  performed,  but  infufpending 
the  effed  till  performed.     The  reafon  of  the  appointing  of 
them  for  fuch  fufpenfions  is  various :  fometime  its  becaufe  the 
perfon  Giving,  promifing,  or  otherwife  conftituting  the  condi- 
tion, is  uncertain  of  the  event  of  the  performance,  and  would 
not  have  the  e^ed  come  to  pafs  without  it.    But  thats  not  al- 
waies:focoetime  though  he  might  be  fure  of  the  event  of  perfor- 
mance, yet  if  he  that  is  to  perform  the  Condition  be  uncertain  , 
irmay  make  way  for  this  conftitution.lt  is  therefore  a  vain  Plea 
of  them  that  fay,   God  appointeth  no  conditions  of  his  Pro- 

L  raifes- 


C70 


niifes,  becaufe  the  event  is  not  to  him  uncertain.  Saith  mUt.. 
M-*rt\n.  ia  nom.  C^nd.  >  Defimtifotet  Difpvfi  itnu  jufpenjio  rx 
eventu  incerto  fututo  ei  'ppofito.  Sic  fane  apstdho-fAnet  qutfutti* 
Yu  non  nornntj  ied''Denijt4b  certis  condttionibtK  eti^m  t:obifcnm 
a^it .  at  omt  i  4m  event  ttum  ip'jC  ^nvpti^  pro  i'ifiKit.i  fuA  lap  tntia 
^ft.i  p-aVidet  (^Hid  occur  Krum  nobu^^  (jnidnos  t^intplexuri,  velde- 
ctinaiurifim'^.  Cor,fer.  Dent.  28  29  30,ji.  &■  ^2.  Ca* 
pitobftJ.  I  Commonly  the  reafon  of. appDincing  Conditions  is 
the  defireab  ncfs  or  the  thing  tobe  pert'ormed^conjoyned  with 
fome  backwardnefs  or  podib  lity  of  backwardnefs  in  the  perfon 
that  is  CO  perform  it.  and  therefore  he  is  drawn  on  by  the  pro^ 
mife  of  that  which  he  is  more  wiihng  to  receive  :  But  many 
other  reafonsthert  mjv  be. 

Ihefi.ft  caufcof  ihe  Condition,  is  theRequirer,  whether 
he  be  Teftator,  Donor,  Stipulator,  Lcgiflacor,  &c.  And  fo 
the  Condition  of  the  Law  or  Covenant  of  orace,  is  fit  ft.  Gods 
condition  <2^  the  Impoftr.  Secondly,  And  is  the  condition  of 
each  i';</^jr/^  as o^/i/f^ to  perform  t.  Thirdly,  And  the  condi- 
tion of  each  proftJfi>;g  (  hnjiiAn  as  having  Prort  ifed  the  perfor- 
mance. Fourthly,  And  the  condition  q{  true  Chrijiinns  only 
2.S  actual  Performers  oi  it. 

The  condition  of  the  Gofpcl  hath  feveral  refpects  according 
to  the  various  refpects  of  the  Law  thatdoih  impofe  it.  Its  the 
Condttwn  of  ajret  Gift  j  for  the  Gofpel  is  a  free  Gift  of  Chrift 
and  Life  :*  It  is  the  Condition  of  a  Promife  •,  becaufe  muth  ol 
the  Gofpel  benefits  are  future.  .It  is  the  Condtticn  of  aTefia- 
ment^  b^^caufe  Chrift  dying  did  leave  this  to  the  Church  as  his^ 
laft  Will,  and  it  was  confirmed  by  the  death  of  the  leftator. 
It  is  the  Condition  of  a  premi4nt  La^^  and  Ad  of  Grace  and 
oblivion ;  becaufe  God  made  it  as  Legiflator  and  Redor  of  the 
world ,  in  order  to  theconduding  of  his  people  rotheir  happi- 
neA ;  Tt  is  the  condition  of  a  ^Hnatory  Latv  ,  in  that  it  is  a  duty 
commanded  on  pain  of  death  and  for  the  avoiding  of  that 
death. 

Fourthly,  The  prepofition  {^^y"]  in  our  prefent  queftion,' 
may  fignifie,  either  the  ufc  and  Intereft  of  any  Medium  ir> 
General ;  or  die  of  a  tijuc  canfe  eonftitutive  or  efficient.  So 
aiuch  of  the  terras. 

'•  fropofitm 


(.15) 


PropofitioH  I.  Since  Ada^s  fall  ,  it  is  impoflTible  for 
man  to  be  juftified  by  a  perfed:  finlefs  Obedience  of  his  own, 
(  except  Chrift  only  ;  )  and  conltquently  impofliblc  for  him  to 
be  juftined  by  the  Lawconfidered  m  that  form  aud  tenor  a^  ic 
was  given  to //^««»»  :  for  all  men  are  finners  j  and  ihat  LawwiU 
uft.fie  nofinncr. 

Propofuion  2.  By  the  works  of  the  Mofaical  Law  ,  no 
man  canbe  juftified.  And  therefore  the  Jews  feek  Righreouf- 
ncft  where  it  is  not  to  be  found,  while  they  think  that  pardon  of 
fin  and  acceptance  with  God  arc  to  be  obtained  by  the  bare 
works  of  that  Law:  while  they  overlook  or  rejtd  Chrift  who  is 
the  end  of  that  Law  for  rightcoufnefs  to  every  Believer  Speci- 
ally now  that  Law  is  Abrogated  or  ceafcd,it  were  a  double  error 
to  expeA  Juftification  by  its  works. 

"Propofuion  5,  Much  lefs  can  they  be  juftified  by  the  forefaid 
Law,  who  in  ftead  of  fulfilling  it,  do  but  falfely  imagine  that 
they  fulfill  it. 

Prcpofition  4.  No  man  can  be  juftifi'd  by  works  properly 
meritorious,  becaufe  nomin  hath  any  fuchatali;  nor  may 
we  once  imagine  that  we  have  any  fuch  works  as  T>aul  fpeaks  of 
(  and  the  Jews  thoughf  they  had  )  which  make  the  reward  to  be 
not  of  f  it  ace  biit  of  Debt, /?<?»».  4.4.  much  lefs  that  wc  are  jufti- 
fied by  fuch  ;  even  Gofpel  works  ana  faith  it  fclfdo  not  juftfie 
on  this  account,  and  a  conceit  that  they  are  thus  meritorious 
would  but  turn  them  into  condemning  fins. 

Prcpofition  5.  No  aft  of  mans,  no  not  faith  it  felf  can  ju- 
ftifie  as  an  acr  or  work,  nor  as  ThitaH  in  fp'cie -.  thuis,  the 
nearcft  and  formal  rcafon  of  its  juftifying  In  creft  w«/?  no:  be 
ic'chx.  either  from  the  General  or  fpecial  nature  of  the  act  ic 
felf:  and  therefore  It  is  not  f<iith  as  faith,  that  is,  as  iris  an  ap- 
prchenfion  of  Chrift  or  recumbency  on  him,  that  fuftif^erh: 
nor  yet  as  an  fnftrument  thus  acting.  The  nature  of  the  act  is 
but  its  aptitude  to  its  office  ot  juftifying  Intereft,  and  not  the 
formal  caufe  of  it. 

'Propofi'i':^  6  No  work  or  act  of  man  is  any  true  proper 
Clufeot  his  juftificarjon,  (^  as  Juftihcation  is  commonly  taken 
in  the  '"»ofpel :  )  neither  Principal  or  luftrumentaLThe  h  g!,eft 
Intcrcil  that  they  caa  have,  is  but  to  be  a  condition  of  our  jufti- 

L  2  fic4tion 


7^) 

cion,  and  (o  a  Di/pofiiio  mora/if^  which  therefore  fome  call 
ca>tJ4dli/p:ft(iva^ and  Tome  c<<«/<  /ine (fui non  ,  and  its  indeed bac 
a  Ti^minallcmfe^  and  truly  no  c^w'^  at  al'. 

Profofiion  7.  Whatfoever  woiks  do  ftand  in  offofition  to 
Chritt^or  difjunct  from  him,yea  or  that  ftand  not  inaduefubordi- 
fiatioa  to  hira,arc  fo  far  from  Juftifying  even  as  conditions,  that 
ihey  are  fins  which  dodefervc  condemnation. 

Propoftiott  8.  Works,  as  taken  for  the  Imperate  Ads  of 
Obedience  external,  diftind  from  the  firft  Radical  Graces,  arc 
not  fo  much  as  conditions  of  our  Juftificationasbegun,  or  our 
being  put  into  a  J  uftified  ftate. 

'Propcfitlon  9,  Repentance  from  dead  works*  denying  our 
our  felves,  renouncing  our  own  Righteoufnefs,  c^c.  {  much  lefs 
external  Obedience  )  are  not  the  receptive  condition  of  our  Ju- 
ftification,  as  faith  is,  that  is,  Their  nature  is  not  to  be  an  ac  - 
rual  Acceptance  of  Chrift,  that  is,  theyarenot  faith,  and  there- 
fore are  not  defigned  on  that  account  to  be  the  Condition  of 
our  Juftification. 

Propofttion  10.  God  doth  not  juftiiie  us  by  Imputing  our 
own  faith  to  us  in  ftead  of  perfcd  Obedience  to  the  Law,  as  if  - 
it  were  fuffie lent ,  or  cfteemed  by  him  fufficient  to  fupply  its 
place  ;  For  it  is  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  that  in  point  of  value 
and  merit  doth  fupply  its  place:  nor  doth  aiiyworkof  ours 
jujftifie  us  by  fatisf^ing  for  our  fins :  for  thats  the  workofChrill 
the  Mediator  .-  Our  faith  and  love  and  obedience,  which  arc  for 
the  receiving  and  improving  of  him'and  his  Righteoufnefs  and  fo 
ftand  in  full  fubordination  to  him,  are  not  to  be  made  co-parc- 
ners  of  his  office  or  honor. 

Affirm.  Prepofiticn  ^i^.  We  are  juftified  by  the  meritsof 
a  pcrfe^ finlefs Obedience  of  Chrift  (  together  with  hs fuffer- 
ings )  which  he  performed  both  to  the  Law  of  nature,  the  Law 
of  Mofesy  and  the  Law  which  was  proper  to  himfelf  as  Medi- 
ator ,  as  the  fobject  obliged. 

PrcfofttioH  2.  There  is  fomewhat  in  the  nature  of  faith  it 
kii  in  jpicit,  which  makes  it  fit  to  be  clt^gd  and  appointed  by 
God  to  be  the  great  JttmmAry  Condition  of  the  Gofpel ;  that 
ic  be  Rfceptivc  (  an  Acceptance  ;cf  Chrift  J  is  the  nature  of  the 

thing? 


C77) 


thing ;  but  chat  it  be  a  condition  of  our  Juftification,  is  from  the 
will  and  conftitucion  of  the  Donor  and  Juftifier. 

Prcpojitfin  3.  There  19  alfo  fomewhat  in  the  nature  of  Re- 
pentance, felt-denyal,  renouncing  all  other  Saviours,  and  our 
own  righteoufnefs,  deliring  Chrift,loving  Chrift,intcnding  CJod 
and  Glory  as  our  end,  (  procured  by  <^  hrift,  )confctiingfin, 
^j.  which  make  them  apt  to  be  Difpofnive  Con^liions.andfo 
to  be  comprized  or  implycd  in  faith  rhe  fummary  Receptive  con- 
dition, as  ics  necertary  attendants  at  icaft. 

Propofi  ion  4.  Accordingly  God  hath  joyncd  thcfe  together 
in  hisPromife  and  conftitution,  making  taith  the /«»«jw«»r7  unci 
receptive  Condi  ion ^  and  making  the  faid  acts  of  Repentance, 
fclf  denyal  renouncing  our  own  righteoufncfs,  &  difclaiming  in 
heart  uft  ficition  by  the  works  of  the  Law,and  the  renouncing 
oi  A\  other  Sav  ours, alfo  thedefiring  and  loving  of  Chrift  offer- 
ed and  the  willing  of  God  as  ouruod,  and  the  renouncing 
of  all  othtr  Godsj.  and  fo, of  the  world,  fltfti  and  devil;  ac 
leaft  in  the  refolution  of  the  heart  ;  I  fay  making  thcfe  the  dip- 
pofiii-je  Conr.i  ions  ,  which  are  everimplyed  when  faith  only  is 
expreffed ,  forae  of  them  as  fubfervient  to  faith  ,  and  per- 
haps forae  of  them  as  real  parts  of  faith  it  felf.  (  Ol  which  more 
anon.  ) 

Tropofi  im  5.  The  Gofpe!  promifeth  Juftification  to  all  that 
will  Believe.  (  or  are  'Believers.  )  '1  o  be  a  Betirver  and  to  be 
a  'Difrip'e  of  Chrift, in  ^chpture  fenfe  is  all  one,and  fo  is  it  to  be 
a  DiJcipU  and  to  be  a  Chriftjan  :  therefore  the  fenfe  of  the  pro- 
raife  is.  that  we  (hall  be  juftified,  if  we  become  true  Chriftians 
or  Difcip/eto(  ChrifT  ;  and  therefore  juftifying  faith  comprc- - 
hendeth  all  that  is  efifential  to  our  Difuplenfhip  or  Chriftianity 
at  its  conftitutive  caufes. 

Pro:ojition  6,  It  is  not  therefore  any  one  fingle  Act  of  faith 
alone  by  which  we  are  juftifi:d,  but  it  is  many  Phyfical  acts 
conjunctly  which  conftitute  that  faith  which  the  Gofpcl  makes 
the  condition  of  Life.  Thofc  therefore  that  call  anyone  \zt : 
or  two  by  the  name  of  juftifying  faith,  and  all  the  reft  by  the 
name  of  work>.  and  fay  that  it  is  only  the  adlof  recumbency 
on  Chrift  as  Prieft,  or  on  Chrift  as  dying  for  us,  or  only  the 
act  of  apprehending. or  accepting  his  imputed  Rightcoufnefs.  by 

"L  3^  whith  * 


C78) 

which  wc  are  juftified,  and  that  our  AfTnt,  or  Acceptance  of 
him  as  our  '  eicher  and  Lord  ,  our  dctire  of  bim  our  love  to 
him,our  renouncing  other  aviour.  and  our  own  Righteoufiicfs 
&c.  are  the  works  which  P.ni  doth  exclude  fro.n  our  Ju'  ifi' 
cation,  and  that  it  js  Jew.fh  toexp^t  to  be  julhficd  by  thefe 
though  but  as  Conditions  of  Julificution  ;  thde  perf..ns  do 
miih.ke  I'auU  and  pervert  the  DoAnne  of  Faith  and  Juftificati- 
on,  ard  their  Dodrine  tendeth  tocorrupt  the  very  nature  of 
Chriftianity  it  felf.  Though  yet  I  doubt  not  but  any  of  thefe 
aas  conceited  meritorious  (or  otherwifeas  before  explained  in 
the  Negative  )  if  men  can  believe  contradictories  ma^'  be  the 
matter  of  fuch  works  as  /'^«/excludeth  :  And  fo  may  chat  one 
actalfo  which  they  appropriate  the  name  of  juftifying  faith 
to.  ^ 

Trtpfu'toyt  7.  Sincere  obedience  to  God  In  Chrift  is  a  con- 
dition of  our  con  inuance  in  a  ftare  of  Juftifici tion,  or  of  our 
not  lofing  It.  And  our  perfeverance  therein  is  a  condition  of 
our  appearing  in  that  ftate  before  the  L^^d ,  at  our  departure 
hence. 

'Propofit'tovt  8.  Our  Faith,  Love,  and  Works  of  \  ove,  or  fin- 
cere  Obedience,  are  conditions  of  our  fentcntial  Juftihc'ation  by 
Chrift  at  the  particular  and  general  Judgement  {  which  is  the 
great  Juftific^iion.  )  And  fo  as  they  will  p  ove  cur  Intereft  in 
Chrift  our  Kighteoulnefs,  fo  will  they  materially  themfelves 
juftific  us  againft  the  particular  fajfe  Accufation  of  being  fi- 
nally impenirenr,  Unbelievers,  not  Loving,  not  obe\  ing  fin- 
cerely.  For  codcnya  talfeaccufaiiunislufficient  toourjufti- 
ficacion. 

Prop'firloK  9.  As  Glorification  and  Deliverance  from  Hell, 
is  by  fome  called  Executive  pardon  or  juftiHcationi  ^o  fhefore- 
faid  ads  are  conditions  of  thatexecu  i  )p,  which  arc  conditions 
of  Jultification  by  the  lentenceof  the  Judge. 

"fropo^t^n.  10.  As  to  a  real  inherent  Juftice,  orjuftifica- 
tion,  in  this  life  we  have  it  in  part  (  in  our  SanAification  and 
Obedience  ;  and  in  the  life  to  come  we  ftiail  have  it  in  perfec- 
tion. 

So  much  for  the  explicatory  Propofitions. 

I  come 


C7P) 


I  Come  now  to  prove  che  fumof  the  Afifirnatlve  Propofici- 
on>  toge  her  To  far  as  they  relolve  the  Qu^lTion  in  hand,^  / ^. 
thac  works  or  acts  of  min  have  (uch  anin  crcft  in  our  jultifica- 
on,  and  ■iire  fo  far  cond  tions  as  is  here  aflerced. 

My  Hi  ft  proof  is  from  chofe  Texcs  of  Scripture  which  ex- 
preflyfpeakof  Juftfication  by  fuch  actsor  works. 

If  we  are  jui'i.ied  5/  our  words  and  works,  then  arc  they 
nolefsch:n  cordidons  of  Juftification.  Buc  we  arc  juftified 
"Sy  them.  Er^o.Sic. 

The  Confcqucnce  of  the  Major  is  plain,  firft,  In  that  the 
Prepofition .  'S » ]]  doth  figmfie  no  lels  chen  the  Inrereft  of  fome 
mean';:  but  thefe  Works  can  be  no  means, but  either  a  conditi- 
on or  a  caufe.whch  is  more;  Acaufe.rhe  perfons  that  now  I  deal 
with,  will  not  affim  them  Co  be:  If  thc\  do,  chen  they  afcribe 
much  more  to  them  then  to  be  a  condition.  Secondly,  ■  he  Inte- 
reftoF  faith  it  felf  is  expreffed  by  no  higher  terms  then  [!5/,  ] 
that  is,  Ki  or  =^>x,  or  -f  :  and  fois  the  Intereft  of  thefe  othec 
acts. 

The  Minor  is  cxprefg  i .  In  Mat.  ii.  5  6, 3 7. [[For  i>jtljj  words 
thou  (hjit  be  jttftified^  and  by  thy  ^rords  thoti  fh^t  be  conhmyied~^y 
(  h'/,  ry/>'3  .V  ;  jchic  is  ,  ac  t)ie  day  of  Judgement,  in  the 
great  Juftification.  2.  J'w.  2. 24.  it  fte  then  how  that  B)  Works 
(--^  *?>■•'•'  J  amanis  jufijid,  and  not  by  fiith  enh  (  Krt  k<  s'jt 
■y^wi  f/.ot'oi,  )  rhisfpeaksof  Juftification  in  this  life. 

When  men  argue  againft  Ju:tific^tion  by  our  "iipordf  or  woykj,  I 
dcfire  i.ro  underftand  whether  it  be  the  words  or  the  fenfe  that 
they  argue  againft  ^f  the  ft'(3r<^/,then  it  is  either  againft  theufeof 
them  fimp/y^  as  being  falfe  or  unmeetorelfe  againft  «»/^««/or;«- 
ble  ufe  of  them. For  the  former  thev  have  no  ground;for  you  fee 
it  is  the  exprefs  language  of  Chrift  himfelf  and  JjisApoftle.And  as 
to  the  later,  I  cafily  grant  that  no  '•cripture  phrafe  (houldbeun- 
feafon?bly  ufed.  But  if  it  be  not  the  words  but  the  fenfe  that 
they  blame,  why  then  do  they  harp  fo  much  on  the  words 
sbemfclves,  and  raife  the  moft  of  the  odium  from  thence  ?  And 

what 


(8o) 


what  is  the  unwarrantable  fenfe  ?  I  know  not  of  any  lower  fcnfc 
that  they  can  put  on  thefe  words,  then  what  importeth  theln- 
tereft  of  a  condition  .-  As  for  that  of  Mat.  1 2.  they  fay  little 
to  it.  And  as  to  that  of  Jame^,  they  interpret  it  differently 
amongthemfclves  Firft^Sonieof  them  fay  that  7<w«  fpeaksof 
Juftification  before  men,  and  others  fay  he  fpeaksof  Juftificati- 
on  before  God.  The  former  are  eafiiy  confurcd  (  as  they  rc- 
Rrain  the  text  to  that  alone  )  by  the  cxprefs  words  of  the  Texc 
For,  firft,  ver,  13.  it  exprcfly  fpeaks  of  Rightcoufne fs  by  di. 
vine  Imputation,  and  of  Gods  accepting  /^/'r<if'<«/w  into  friend- 
(hip.  Secondly,The  text  fpeaksofthac  Juftihcation  which  con- 
curreth  With  Salvation,  ver.  14.  [  canfaitbfavt  him  ?]  Thirdly, 
It  fpeaks  of  the  Death  of  faith  without  works,  as  to  Profiping^ 
ver.  16.17.  which  is  different  from  mahifefi^tion.  Fourthly, 
Itinftanceth  in  the  fecrct  act  of  Rahaif,  and  fuch  an  act  of  *-/^- 
in-ah^nfy  as  we  read  of  no  men  that  then  juftified  him  for,  nay 
they  were  likcr  to  condemn  him.  Fifthly,  Men  may  juftifiean 
Hypocrite  as  foon  as  the  truly  godly,  and  can  but  conjecture  ac 
the  faith  by  the  works.  But  the  fcope  of  the  text  ftiews  that  it 
is  no  fuch  frivolous  juftification  that  is  here  meant. 

Secondly,  They  that  fay  that  it  is  juftification  before  God 
that  is  here  meant,  (  as  no  doubt  it  is )  have  yet  divers  interpre- 
tations of  the  word  TVorks.  Some  fay,  that  by  PVorkj  is  not 
meant  [  PVorkj  themf elves  ]  indeed, but  a  ^orkjrig  faith.  To  them 
I  fay,  firfl,  I  deny  it,  and  wait  for  better  proof  then  is  yet 
brought.  Secondly,  The  text  nameth  ^w^ri^f  J exprefly  twelve 
times  in  a  few  verfes  :  which  is  not  ufual  in  fpeeches  fo  tropi- 
callasthis  isfuppofcdto  be.  Thirdly,  In  many  or  moft  of  the 
texts,  that  interpretation  would  make  the  words  non-fenfe,  as 
thepcrufall  will  declare.  Fourthly,  If  the  word  [vfvrkj  ]  did 
emphatically  fignifie  the  Q  working  fiatttre^of  faith  ,or  faith 
not  ^Hafidet,  but  (jua  cperans^  it  will  be  all  one  as  to  the  matter 
in  queftion,  and  yield  what  I  defire. 

Others  fay  that  by  xvorkj  is  indeed  meant  the  vforks  themfelves 
properly  ;  but  then  they  fay  that  the  text  fpeaks  not  of  the  Ju- 
ftification of  thepetfonlby  them,but  of  faith  by  them, for  faith, 
lay  they,  alone  doth  juflifie  the  perfon,  ^nd  work'^  cr  ly  juftifk 
feiffa.  Anftvcr,  But  firfl, this contradi<!ieth  the exprcfs text :  for 

vtrft 


verfe  14.  Ic  is  the  Salvation  of  the  perfon  that  is  denycd,; 
and  ver.  11.  It  it  thejuftificacionof  Abraham  himfelf  that  is 
there  mentioned  ;and  ver.  24.  it  is  the  mxn  that  is  faid  to  be  ;«/?/- 
f,ei  by  ^orhj  and  not  hy  faich  on/y-  and  verft  2  > .  it  is  R.th/b  her 
I'elfthat  is  fiid  to  be  juflified  by  workj.  Secondly,  The  anfwer 
concradicceth  themfelvcs ,  or  pranceth  what  1  defire :  for  if 
works  juftifie  the  fdith,  they  mult  needs  juflirte  the  perfon  j'j  t  an- 
tftm^  againd  any  accufation of  grof-.  Infidelity  and  Hypocrifie. 
Sometime  the  perfon  is  juftificd  when  his  Action  cannot  be  jufti- 
fied  (as  in  cafe  of  fatisfaccion  and  pardon,-)  bjt  to  juftific 
the  action  it  relf,is  the  higheft  fort  of  juftifying  the  perfon. 

So  that  ail  other  Interpretations  b:;ing  cither  overthrown^  or 
refoived  into  that  which  we  maintam  ,  I  need  to  fay  to 
more  for  the  defending  of  it. 

My  next  proof  is  from  thofe  texts  that  fay,  we  (hall  be  fftdg- 
ed  according  to  our  workj,  and  rt\\>arded  according  to  our  Labour ^ 
&c.  2  Cor.  5.9,  10.  iCor.3.8.  I  Pet.  i.\6,\j.  MattheVp  16. 
27.  &c. 

If  men  (hall  be  juftified^crord'jw^  to  their  works,  thenthofc 
works  are  no  lower  then  a  condition  of  that  juftification ;  But 
the  Antecedent  is  true,  as  I  prove  thus.  If  men  ftiall  be  judg- 
ed according  to  their  works,  therefore  they  (hall  hcjufttfitd 
according  to  their  works :  fhe  reafon  of  the  Confequencc  is 
evident;  becaufe;«j/jj»«^is  the  Gtntu ^  which  comprehendcth 
Juftification  and  condemnation  as  hsfptcies.  The  reafon  alfo 
of  the  confequencc  of  the  former  Argument  is  apparent :  be- 
caufe  the  term  Q  f>f  judging  according  to  workj']  doth  in  the 
common  ufe  of  men  fignifie  ordinarily  that  which  they  call  the 
yUeritumcaufa,  but  never  any  thinp  lower  then  abareconditi* 
on  •.  nor  can  any  hwer  tolerable  judiciary  fenfe  be  put  upon 
them,  as  might  eafily  be  (hewed  if  it  were  worth  the  ftanding 
on. 

My  next  proof  is  from  thofe  tcKti^  that  exprefly  promifc  the 
pardon  of  fin  on  condition  of  Repentance,  Confefiion,  Cf'c.  If 
Repentance,  and  other  a(^s  are  made  by  the  Gofpel,  conditi- 
ons of  pardon,  (and  our  firft  general  Pardon  J  then  are  they 
made  conditions  of  our  Hrft  admiffion  into  a  ftatc  of  Juftifica- 
tion.   But  the  Aiitecedenc  is  plain,  in  ^O.i.iS,  A-i>ir.  14. 

M  LPiks 


(SO 


Lukf  1^,  1$.  7/4.55.^7.  and  1. 16,  17,18.  j5*f^,55.il, 
id;,  and  18.  28,2.9,30,3  i, :; 2. FroT/.28. 1 3.  ^^'  3  19  with  ma- 
ny more.  1  he  Conleqvicrce  is  plain,  in  that  Purctcn  is  by  very 
many  made  the  uhole  of  our  JuftiHcation  ;  and  by  others 
eonfeflVd  a  chief  part  ;  and  by  all  itsconfelTed  to  be  madeours 
on  the  fame  terms  as  is  Juttificacion  ic  fejf. 

My  fourth  Proof  is  from  ihofe  texts  which  make  thefe  kind 
of  A  di  to  have  the  place  of  a  condition  in  order  to  fa/vat  ion ; 
if  they  are  conditions  of  falyation,  then  are  thcynolefs  then 
conditions  of  our  final  Juftification  :  But  the  Antecedent  is  or- 
dinarily acknowledged   by  the  Opponents,    and    its  proved, 
1  Tim.  4.8.    Heir.  5.9.    i  Tim,  6.18,19.  Luk.  U.  28.  and 
13.24    I   Cor.  9.  24,25,2^,27.    %jv.22.  14.  foha   12.26. 
5o«i. '8.  13.     LMat.  5.20.  Mat.  19.29.     Mat.  6.1,2,4,6. 
and  5.  12,46.  and  10.  41,42.   2  Thejf.  1.5,6.  Co/.  3.  23, 24. 
Htb.6.  10.  2.Tim.  4- 7,8.    g^L  6.  4jS.6,7,8,9,io.  zCor. 
9.  6^9.    fphn  5.  22,  27,  28,  29,  &c.     The  Confcquence  is 
proved  good,  firft,  fn  that  final  Juftification  and  Glorification 
have  the  fame  conditions  ;,  as  is  plain,  both  in  many  Scriptures 
(  mentioned  )  and  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  :  for  that  Juftifi- 
cation   is  the    adjudging   us  to   that  Glory  •    and    there- 
fore*fo  far  as  any  thing  is  the  caufe  or  condition  of  the  Cijory 
it  f^l(^ ;  it  muft  be  the  reafon  of  the  fcntence  which  adjudgeth 
it  to  us.    Secondly,  And  falvation  is  as  free  as  Juftificacion,  and 
no  more  defcrved  by  man  r    and  therefore  the  Apoftle  equally 
exclude  h  works  from both,£p/??.  2.5,8,9.  By  (jracejearejaved, 
through  fait  hfdtjd  that  not  of  jour  ft/ve',  it  if  the  gift  of  God-^not  of 
Vpofk.j  left  any  man  fhonU   hoaft.  \  fo  Tit.  ■?.  5.6,7.  more  fully. 
Now  \i  SalV'^tion  by  grace  tyoHgh faith  VpithoHt   »?<7ri^f,  exclude 
not  fincere  obedience  from  being  a  Condition  of  Salvation, 
then  Jufi^firdtinn  hy  grace  through  f<dith  tvithout  tvorkt,  doth  not 
(  in  Scripture  fer.ce  ;  exclude  fincere  obedience  from  being  the 
condition  of  (urj???j/  Juft<.firation\   nor  Repentance  from  be- 
ing the  condition  of  our  j'fjiifiratioy)  as  hegtin  :  (  for  there  isf^- 
dem  r^tio,  and  rhe  Texc  ma^kes  the  one  as  free  withouc  works, 
as  the  other  )  But  the  Antecedent  is  plain  in  the  Scriptures, 
JErgo,  &c. 
My  fiah  Proof  i$  from  thofe  texts  that  in  terms  feem  to  af- 

fign 


(S3  ) 

fign  a  cafffality  to  fuch  Qbcdicmial  ads,  which  can  he  Interpreted 
of  no  lefs  then  a  conditionitUty  ;  fuch  are  Luke  1 9.17.  Afat.2^, 
3i,2-.,34.3S,4o,4<5.  C?^j;.  22. 16,77,18.  2  Oc».  34.zd,27. 
P/^/^  9I-9>W-  Marl^-J.ip.  1  John  l-iz^i^.  John  lO.if, 
Rev.  3. 10.  and  54. ^hd  7.14,1 5.  ef^.  And  though  fome of 
thefe  texts  fpeak  not  of  Divine  acceptance  to  lifej  yet  firR, 
fome  do  ;  fecondly,  and  the  reft  fpeak  of  no  mercy  but  what 
is  as  freely  given  as  fujlificaiion.  A  mans  own  works  are  exclu- 
ded other  Means  and  parts  of  falvation,  as  well  as  that. 

I  run  over  th^fe  briefly  and  generally,  both  becaufelexped 
thit  the  bare  texts  without  my  Corilments,fliould  work  upon  the 
Confideratc,  afid  bccaufe  I  have  been  fo  much  upon  it  former- 
ly in  other  writings(asConfefs.  v>.  3./;.  )6.  c^f  5.  (^  cap.$,^.2. 
fag.  1 17,1 1 8.  ^  alibi  pajfin^)  as  that  I  apprehend  in  this  work 
mofre  tedioufnefs  than  neciflity.  "  '      *"*  v*       v   v- 

But  the  chief  thing  that  I  further  6cre  Intend,  'is'to  anfwet 
fome  Obje(5lions,that  by  a  Reverend  Brother  in  his  fecond  part 
of  his  Treatife  of  Juftificati6n  art  brought  a^aiiift  me. 

But  before  I  come  to  his  Arguments,  its  neceflary  that  I  a 
little  animadvert  oi^'  his  Defct  iption  of  Tuftification,  that  we 
may  firft  agree  upoh  the  fenTdof  our  te/m's ,  or  at  leaft,  know 
how  to  underftand  one  another. 

Treat.  Of  JuflificatiM.  p.ii6.  []  ffiftijication  u  a  gratiotis 
andjttji  AH' of  (jod^  w'herehj  through  Ctirifl  our  Mediator  and 
Surety y  a  fmner^  hut  repenting  and  Relieving  ,is  pronounced  jnfi, 
anct  hereby  put  into  a  fiate  of  Reconciliation  and  favour  with 
Qod^to  the  p  -at ft'  of  Gods  glorious  attributes^  and  to  the  'Believers 
eternal  falviitioK.  I /hall  not  examine  i  his  Defcrlption  hy  accurate 
Logical  Rules ^^Q. 

AnfA\  Firft.  Doubtlefs  an  accurate,  rather  then  popular 
definition  wouU  as  foon  be  expcded  from  you,  as  frcmmoft; 
and  here  as  anywhere  in  a  Treatife  purpofely  on  the  Subjed. 
Secondly,  ProriUnciatTon  doth  not  go  before  Conftitution,  nor 
put  us  into  a  {Ure  of  Reconciliation  and  favour,  but  find  us  in 
it,  you  fay  your  felf.  pig/ lio.  Tojuflipe^  U  to  confiitute  and  to 
declare'cy  [ronounce  righteous,  And  iriyour  firft  Treatife  of  Ju- 
ftification.  z?**^.  j.Indeid  the  Apo^le,  Rora.  5.   faith,  many 

M  2  ure 


C8+) 


are  mtde  righceon*  by  the  fecond  •A^am  \  which  if  noc  meant 
of  inherent  holinels  doth  imply  that  rherightcoufnefs  we  have 
byChrift,  is  not  meerly  declarative,  but  alio  conftitutivc  ;  and 
indeed,  one  is     in   order  before  the  other  ;  for  a  man  muft  be 
righteous,  before  he  can  be  pronounced  or  declared  Co  to  be.  ] 

Treat,     p.  The  m^pplhatiort  of   (  fufiijication  )  is  attri- 
buttd  to  the  Holj  Ghofr. 

Anfvp.  I  know  not  of  any  fuch  ,  except  firft  ,  where  Ju- 
ftification  is  taken  for  Sandification,  Secondly  ,  or  as  the 
Holy  Ghoft  is  made  the  Author  of  the  Promife,  though  I 
doubt  not  but  he  is  the  Author  of  faith  alfo. 

Treat.  16.  Tht  Socinians  f<tj  Chylft  jufiijietb  only  In- 
Prumenta/iy,  not  principal/y  ;  even  [0  faith  is  faidtofave  :  but 
this  cannot  be^  beeaufe  Chrifi  is  God  as  Vfeil  at  (JMan^  and  there* 
fore^  CAnnot  be  injirumental,  but  principal. 

'^  9^nf^.  As  they  err  on  one  hand,  that  fay  Chrift  juftifi- 
eth  only  Inftrumentally  (  which  flows  from  their  blafphemous 
deny  all  of  his  God-head  )  fo  its  an  error  on  the  other  hand,  to 
fey  that  Chrift  cannot  be  Inftruroental,  but  principal  ;  I  prove 
the  contrary;  firft,  If  Chrift  may  be  an  Officer  appointed  by 
the  Father  to  the  Redemption,  and  ruling  of  mankind,  then  may 
he  be  an  Inftrument.  But,  ^c.  Ergo,  &c. 

Secondly,  If  Chrift  may  be  a  means,  hemay  bean  Inftru- 
ment ^  but  he  may  be  a  mear>s,  for  he  is  called  by  himfelf  the 
way  to  the  Father  :  and  a  way  is  a  means. 

Thirdly,  He  is  called  the  Fathers  fervant :  therefore  he  may 
be  an  Inftrument 

Fourthly,  He  is  faid  tocorae  to  do  his  Fathers  will,  therefore 
heishislnftrument. 

Fifthly,  All  Po^erh  fa?d  to  be  given  him,  even  the  Power 
of  judging,  fohn^.  22.  and  A<f'^ttlgeVc  28.  18,  19.  therefore 
he  is  the  Fathers  Inftrument  in  judging. 

And  your  rca Ton  is  invalid,  (  viz..  beeaufe  Chrift  is  God  J 
for  be  is  Man,  as  well,  as  God  ^  and  fo  may  be  Inftrumental. 

Treat. 


Treat,  p.  129,  130.  It  founds  as  intolerable  DoClrine  in 
my  ears,  that  Chrtfl  our  Mediator  did  only  €xpii>te  bji  hi'S  death 
fins  againfl  the  Lave  and  Covenart  ofworkjt  hht  that  thoje  that  are 
agdinj}  the  CovcKant  of  Grace-,  tiC- 

Anfw.K  fin  is  againft  the  Law  of  Grace  or  Gorpel,firft,becaijre 
itisagainft  fome  objed  revealed  in  iheGofpel, which  the  (in  is 
againft,(  asChrift)  Ihus  fin  wascxj  iated  by  Clirift  :  zly.Asit  is 
againft  a  Precept  ot  the  Gofpel  and  thus  it  is  expiated  by  Chrift  : 
Sly.Asitisa  breach  of  a  mans  own  Promifeor  Covenant  made  to 
Chrift  upon  the  Gofpel  invitation.  And  thus  it  is  expiated  by 
Chrift.  4ly.  Or  as  it  hath  refpcct  to  the  Gofpel  commination,  fo 
as  to  make  a  man  theobjeft  ofthe  aAuall  curfc  of  this  New  Co- 
venant,or  the  pcrfon  to  whom  its  proper  penalty  is  become  actu- 
ally due  J  as  every  fin  msde  the  penalty  of  the  Hrft  Law  actually 
due  to  us. This  is  it  that  I  have  faid.that  C  hiill  doth  not  expiate, 
and  none  but  this.  Some  Divines  fay^the  Gofpei  hath  no  proper 
curfc  or  commination  &penalty.l  am  paft  doubt  that  it  hath,even 
non-liberation,  a  privation  of  all  the  lalvation  offered  thera,and 
the  Remedilefnefs  of  their  ftate,  &c.   and  I  have  oft  opened 
this,  and  proved  that  only  final  Jmpcnitency  and  Infidelity  ,  or 
the  finall  non-performance  of  the  conditions  of  life,  are  thus 
peremptorily  threatned  ,  and  make  a  man  the    SuSjed:  of  the 
proper  actual  curfe  of  this  Law  of  Grace.    And  if  afcer  all  ex- 
plications ,  you  will  ftill  carry  it  in  confufion,  or  intimate  that 
men  hold  intolerable  Doctrine,  omitting  their  explications,  and 
by  generals  making  that  theirs  which  the  v  disclaim  .-    our  next 
reply  fhall  be  patience  ;    or  if  you  think  indeed,  either  that  the 
Law  of  Grace  doth  oblige    any  under    the  penary  of  reme- 
d  lefs  non-liberation,  bcfides  the  finally  Impenitent  and  Unbe- 
lievers, or  that  Chrift  dyed  to  expiate  any  mans  pvedominant 
final  Impenitency  or  Unbelief,  1  will  not  trouble  you  with  any 
©iher  confutation  then  a  denyal  of  it. 

Treat,  p.  ibid.  RtpeKtance  is  not  an  i*7^red'ent  to  our  JnflifcA- 
tVK  ai  faith  u  ;  Repentance  quilifeththe  ^ubje^l^but  fi'.l'h  tmme- 
iutl)  rcciivith  it, 

M  3  Anfw6T^ 


(8^) 


iy^nfver.  The  Word  /t«^reMf»t  "s  more  ambiguous  then 
to  be  worthy  the  labour  of  difcuHing  :  But  your  affigncd 
difF^rence  I  ever  did  allo-iV.  And  yet  mul\  we  voluminouily 
differ,  when  I  have  cold  you  that  I  allow  it  ?  But  then  I 
add,  that  this  difference  is  in  the  nature  of  the  ads,  andincheir 
aptitude  to  their  oKicc.  But  in  the  general  nature  of  ^#/«(r  Con- 
ttttions  of  p^rdon^  which  is  the  neareft  reafon  of  their  intereft,they 
agree,  though  upon  feveral  reafons  they  are  made  conditions. 

Treat.  [  ive  are  not  jftflifiid  bj  tite  Habit  of  faith  -  but  by 
theAa,-]  ^ 

Anf^er.  I  faid  fo  too  in  my  Aphorifms.  But  the  reafon?  of 
a  learned  man  (  Dr.  fValti^  in  his  friendly  animadverfions )  h^ve 
perfwaded  me  that  it  is  unfound. 

Treat,  p.  129.  It  u  ajfertedf  that  fnfiijication  called  \h 
Titulo,  or  virtual^  ii  nothing  but  the  Grant  of  it  in  the  Gof- 
pel  :  'But  I  fee  not  how  that  can  be  called  oftr  fujlificdti- 
on.  ■•«"" 

Anfw,  Firft,  That  which  is  aflerted,  is,  firft,That  thcGof- 
pelisthe  Initrument  juftifying.  Secondly,  That  the  moral  act 
of  theGofpel-GrantC  andGods  Will  by  it)  is  Juftification  in 
fenfuaUivo.  Thirdly,  That  the  Relation  refultingthcre-frona, 
is  our  paffive  Juftification. 

Secondly,  Can  you  fee  how  a  Princes  pardon  under  his 
hand-writing  can  be  the  Inftrumentof  a  Traitors  pardon  -^and 
how  the  moral  or  civil  Action  of  that  Inftrument,  and  of  the 
Prince  by  it,  can  be  active  pardon  ;  and  how  the  Relation 
effected  by  it  can  be  paflivc  pardon  ?  If  you  can  fee  it  there , 
you  may  fee  it  here  ;  And  if  yon  cannot ,  many  a  one 
can. 

Treat.  //  «  the  fgn  or  Infirumsnt  declaring  it  :.  mtjufifi' 
cation  it  f elf, 

j^-^Viho  ever  faid,and  wh{re,that  paflfive  J  u(lification(yea  or 

active) 


C87) 

sctivc )  is  the  Gofpel  it  felf,  or  thefign?  The  Letter  is  the 
ign  ;  The  adual  fignification  of  Gods  will  thereby  is  the  jufti- 
lyingaft.   The  Relation  thence  refultingon  us,  is  ourpafiivc 
J  unification.  Thefe  have  been  oft  recited. 

Treat.  ^As  the  grant  orfrotnife  of  our  Sanliifcation  is  not  vur 
SantiijicMion, 

Anfvp.  Goodreafon:  The  difference  is  notto  you  unknown: 
Sanftihcation  ;^  pa'sivcj  being  a  Phyfical  effcd ,  mufthavca 
PhyficaJ  caufe  ,  and  therefore  a  bare  moral caufe  cannot  pro- 
duce it.  But  pardon  or  juftiHcation  being  but  a  Relative  etfed, 
may  be  produced  ^er  nadam  rffuhanttam  a,  fundamtnto.  2.  BuC 
fuppofe  God  had  made  a  promife  ofSanf^ification  on  condition 
of  faith  •  would  not  the /?/|^^rtoSandification  have  refulted 
immediately  from  this  promife,  the  condition  being  performed  ? 
And  that  i?/^i5?f  hath  the  fame  Relative  nature  ,  as  conftitutive 
Juftification,  and  pardon  it  felf  hath. 

Treat,  yind  as  oh  the  contrary  our  condemnation  rvhile  ft'* 
ahUe  in  /in,  or  Qods  an^er  /tgainfi  the  [inner  ■,  it  not  the  threatning 
promtilged ,  i^ut  that  rvhich  comtsjrom  God  himfelf. 

Anfvf.  I .  Our  Condemnation  ^er  fertentiam  Judicii  ,  is  not 
the  thing  in  queftion ,  nor  yet  the  explication  ot  it  ^  but  our 
conflitu:ivc  condemnation.  And  that  it  is  not  indeed  the  Letter 
of  the  Law,  (  whoever  faid  fo  )  but  a^^ve  ,  it  is  the  adion  of 
the  Law  ,  &  p-^JJive  famfta^  it  is  the  Relative  etTedt  of  the 
Law. 

2,  From  your  own  Argument  reverft,  Tunrefiftibly  make 
good  my  Caufe  againft  you.  ^condemnation  adive  is  the  Laws 
act,  and  condemnation  Pafsive  is  the  Laws  immediate  effed  : 
therefore  Juftificaton  is  alike  produced  by  the  Promife  or  Gift 
in  the  Gofpel  The  Antecedent  is  proved,  /ohn  5.  i  8.  he  that 
htlitvcth  onhiw^isnot  cor.demned^  (  for  the  Obligation  isdiffol- 
ved  )  but  he  thi'.t  bilievcth  mt^ts  conden'.ned  already,  j  Vvbich 
muft  be  by  fome  Law.  it  being  before  Juugement  and  Executi- 
on, 2  Ccr.  3  9. 1  he  Law  in  its  delivery  is  called  [  the  miniftra- 

tion 


C88) 


tl«n  of  condemnation]  and  that  of  the  Gofpcl  [|che  mini- 
ftration  of  rightcoufne'ls  ]  /#'«■  i.  o.  men  arc  faid  ro  be  Q  eoi- 
•vincedoftheLii^MtrAKfgrf^'j's.^  Though  'l\i'il  confute  the 
faWe  conceics  of  Jurtification  by  t!ie  Law,  yet  he  rook  them  for 
no  unfit  phrafes ,  to  (peak  of  ^the  Latv  w-^orkJKg  ivr^th'2  Rom. 
4.  15.  [  rhecurfc«f  the  Law  ~\  Gal.  5.  i  ^  And  faith,  ivhitfo- 
ever  the  L-:tVi>  Jaiih^  it  faith  to  them  that  are  under  the  Law  ~\  Rom. 
3.  1*9.  When  the  LaW' cowes .,  ftn  reviveth^Arti'^e die,  Rorn.  7. 
8  9.  tlierefore  we  are  faid  to  be  [delivered  from  the  L-iW^  j 
Jiom.  8.   2.  &  Gd.  3.1;;.   Rom.  7,  6.  ^n^Gal.  3.  21.   //  there 
had  been  n  L:iw  oiuen  rvh'ch  cou'd  have  ^'ven  life  ,  ri^hteoufnefi 
pjould  have  been  by  the  Larv.     Hence  then  is  mention  of  being 
iH^ified  b)the  LaVc^g,il.  5.4.  and  mens  being  debtors  to  the  Law^ 
Gai.  5.  3.  And  fomewhatth  s  way  is  implycd  by  Nicodemtu  , 
lohn  7.51.  doth  our  LaW  judge  any  m.tn  before.,  &c.  ]   In  a  word, 
what  more  common  among  Divines ,  then  to  fay,  \  the  La^ 
curjeih  or  condemneth  finners'^  And  then  it  is  not  abhorrent 
from  the  nature  of  a  Law  of  Grace,  an  ad  of  Oblivion,  to  ab- 
folvcand  juftifie  finners. 

Treat.  Neither  then  could  wefaj^  that  we  areJHJiified  by  Chrifi 
c'lven  to  us-,  but  by  the  propofition  laid  down  in  the  Scripture^ 
Tvhereas  all  fay  that  the  objed  um  quod  of  our  faith  is  ens  incom- 
plexum  ,  not  the  promife  of  (^hrift  ,  bm  Chrifi  himfelf  fra- 
nfifed. 

eyinf^*  Its  no  impofsiWe  thing  to  be  juftified  both  by  Chrift, 
and  by  the  Promife.  There  is  no  ground  to  fuppofe  co-ordi- 
nates to  be  contraries.  Why  may  not  Chrift  given  us,  juftifie 
us  as  the  meritorious  caufe,  and  a  principal  efficient;  and  his 
Gofpcl-grant,  as  his  Inftrument  ?  And  accordingly  each  of 
them  may  betheobjedcf  faith.  The  principal  objcd:  isanf«/ 
incoMplexunt^  Chrift  himfelf: but  a  fubordinat  Objed  is  both  the 
Doftrine  Revealing  what  he  is  and  hath  done,  and  the  promife 
whichofferethhimtous,  and  tclleth  us  what  he  will  do,  IF  a 
Princes  Son  redeem  a  woman  from  Captivity ,  or  the  Gal- 
lows, and  caufe  an  Inftrument  under  his  own  band  (and  the 
Kings )  to  be  fent  to  her,  aHuring  her  of  pardon  ?  and  liberty, 

and 


C89) 


and  honours  with  himfclf,  if  (he  will  take  him  for  her  hu«iband, 
and  truit  him  for  the  accomphfhraent  ?  Is  it  nor  polsible  roc 
this  woman  to  be  pardoned  and  dehvered  by  the  King  by  the 
Prmces  ranfom  ,  by  the  Prince  cfpou fed  ,  and  by  her  marriage 
with  him,  and  by  the  Inlkument  of  pardon  or  conveyance  You 
may  be  encidied  by  a  Deed  of  Cifc  and  yet  it  may  be  an  ens  in- 
complexum  that  is  beftowed  on  you  by  that  Deed,  and  enncheth 
you  too.  Your  Money  and  your  Leafe,  both  may  gi\  c  you  title 
to  your  houfe.  The  promife  is  Gods  Deed  of  Gift ,  bellowmg 
on  us  Chrift  and  pardon,  or  JuftiHcation  with  him. 

Treat.  Befides^  Abraham  vfas  Itijiifieii,  and  ke  i'  m>tde  the  pat- 
tern of  all  thjt  /hill  be  lufi'^ed  :  Tet  the^e  was  no  Sc  iptare- 
grant,  cr  deed  of  gi  J  in  verittng^declaring  th^s  :  God  then  commtt' 
fjiCAting  hirnftif  to  "B clivers  tn dn  immediate  manner. 

Anfw.  Was  there  no  Gofpel-grant  then  extant  ?  no  deed 
of  Gift  of  Chrift  and  his  Righteoufnefs  to  alUhatdiouId  be- 
lieve ^  Nothing  to  affure  men  of  Ju'tificationbi' faith  ,  but  im- 
mediate communications  to  Believers  ?  If  fo,  then  either  there 
was  no  Church,  and  no  falvation  :  or  a  Church  and  falvation 
without  faith  in  Chrifl :  and  either  taith  in  the  Mefliah  to  come 
for  pardon  and  life  ,  was  a  duty  ,  or  no  duty  :   If  no  duty, 

then If  a  duty,  then  there  was  a  Law  enjoyning  it ,  and 

that  Law  muft  needs  contain  orbeconjunil  with  a  revelation 
of  Chrift,  and  pard(»n  and  life  to  be  had  by  him.  I  fuppofe 
tliat  whatever  was  the  ftanding  way  of  Life  and  Juftification 
then  to  the  Church,  had  a  ftanding  precept  and  promife  to  en- 
gage to  the  duty  and  fecure  the  benefi'.  1  know  not  of  duty 
without  Precept,  nor  of  faith  without  a  word  to  be  believed. 
But  this  word  was  not  written  !  True  I  but  what  of  that  ?  Was 
iteverthelefs  a  Law  or  Promife,  the  Objcft  of  Faith,or  Inftru- 
menr  of  Juftificarion  -*  The  promife  of  the  'eed  might  be  con- 
vc'ghed  by  Tradition,and  doubtlefs  was  To.  Or  if  there  had  b  en 
no  general  conditional  grant  or  offer  of  pardon  through  Chrift 
in  thofe  times ,  but  only  particular  communications  to  fome 
men,  yet  would  thofe  have  been  nsverthelefs  inlirumen.al 

M  Treat; 


Treat.  Threfore  t$  cj'l  thisCrant  «r  CoaJrUul  Prtm'feitt 
the  Scn^ tttn^  Whofocver  (hall be leve  lliall  be  juftificd, a  tran- 
fis'.t  dH  of  Go^,  ii  verj  w^prop--,  uvUJs  in  fuclo  a  Je^.fe^  m  ^e  fay^ 
fuih  >i  marts  writing  uloii hand ,  and  th4t  is  wholly  i'npert.mnt 
to  our  purpyfe. 

A»f'^.  There  are  two  diftindadsof  God  here  that  I  call 
Tranfient.    The  hrft  is  the  Enafting  of  this  Law,  or  giving  this 
promiTe.  If  this  were  not  Gods  aft,then  it  is  not  his  Law  or  pro- 
mifc    If  it  be  his  ad,  it  is  either  Tranfient,  or  Immanent.   I 
have  not  bcfn  accuftomcd  to  believe  tbatLegiflation  ,  Promi- 
fing,  c^^.  are  no  ads,  or  are  Immanent  ai^s.  The  fccond  is  the 
continued  Moral  Adion  of  the  Word,  which  is  alfo  Gods  Afti- 
on  by  that  Word  as  his  Inftrument  :  As  it  is  the  Aftion  of  a 
written  Pardon  to  Acquit,  and  of  a  Lea  fe  to  give  Title,  ^r. 
And  fo  the  Law  is  faid  to  abfolvc,  condemn,  command,  &€* 
jyhat  it  fi^thiit  Jaith  to  themthut  are  under  the  La\\>  :    And  to 
fay,  is  to  Ad.  Though  phyfically  this  is  no  other  Adion  ,  then 
a  fign  pcrformeth  in  fignifying ,  or  difandamentum  in  producing 
the  Relation,  which  is  called  the  near  eft  efficient  of  that  Relati- 
on.  Now  either  you  think  ihdit  to  oblige  f  tbemofteflential 
ad  of  Laws )  to  abfolvcy  condemn,  &c.  are  Gods  ads  by  his 
Word,  or  not.  If  not,  the  miftakc  is  fuch  as  I  dare  not  confute, 
for  fear  leaft  by  opening  thegreatncfs  of  it ,  I  offend  yon.   If 
yea;  then  either  it  is  Gods  Immanent  ad,  or  his  Tranfient. 
The  former  I  never  to  this  day  heard  or  read  any  man  affirm  ic 
to  be.  That  which  is  done  by  an  Inftrument,  isnolmmanent 
ad  in  God:  To  oblige  to  duty,  to  give  right  to  Impunity  and 
Salvation,  &c.  are  done  by  Inftrumcnts,t/;?..the  Word  of  Jod, 
as  it  is  the  fignifier  of  his  will :  therefore  they  are  not  Immanent 
Ads.  Moreover,  that  which  is  begun  in  time,  and  is  not  from 
Eternity,  is  no  Immanent  A51.   But  fuch  arc  the  fore-mention- 
ed :  because  the  word  which  is  the  Inftrument,was  indited  in 
lime.    Laftly,  that  which  maketh  a  change  on  the  extrinfick  ob- 
ject is  no  Impaancnt  act,  but  fuch  are  thcfe  Moral  acts  of  the 
Word  :  for  they  change  our  Relations,   and  give  us  a  Right 
which  we  had  noc  before,  0'c,  therefore  they  arc  certainly  tran- 
fient 


licnt  arts.   A  thing  that  I  once  thought  I  fliould  never  by  man 
have  been  pat  to  prove. 

Treat,  pag.  i?0.  ^ti  true  at  tked^y  of  f^dgetmnt  there  wll 
h  afolemn  and  more  com  f  lent  Jnfttfjing  of  u. ,«  /  have  eij where 
Jhervsd^ 

^Anfvr.  Youhavevcry  wellfliewedit:  and  I  take  grateful^ 
ly  that  Ledarc,  and  chis  Concelsiou. 

Treat,  pag.  i^i.  Indeed r^ecAnnot then  be fa'id to  he  j'^ffified 
hj  Faith,  Sx-c.  Hence  thi  k-nd of  Infiificatton  jViU  ce^t/e  it  hta* 
ven  (  Ai  imfljmg  imperfe^ijrt,  ). 

Anf^.  And  I  dcfirc  you  to  obfcrvc  ,  that  if  it  be  no  dif- 
honour  to  C  hrift,  chac  we  be  there  (  through  hjs  grace  )  cvcr- 
laitingly  juftified  without  hi- Impu  edrighieoufriefs,  or  pardon, 
or  faith  pro /«/«>-o,  it  canno:  be  any  difhonourtohim  here,  :hat 
we  (hould  repent,  and  believe,  and  be  fanctified,  nor  that  ihofe 
fhould  be  conditions  of  further  mercy  ,  and  fufficienc  of  tliem- 
felvesto  ju(tifie«S3gainftany  falfc  charge  that  we  are  Impeni- 
tent, unfanctified  Infidels.  If  a  perfect  cure  difgrace  not  our 
PhyHtian  then  furc  an  imperfect  cure  and  the  acknowledgemenC 
of  it,  is  no  diihonour  to  our  Phyfician  now. 

Treat,  pag.  137.  Thus  all  thofe  Arguments^  If  vte  be  Jht 
fiifedbyfAtth,  then  by  our  ovfn^ork,^  tmd  that  thststogivetoe 
much  to  faith,  yea  more  then  fotnt  f*^  thij  do  to  rvor^j  ^  rvhich 
they  hold  a  condition  of  our  Jujiiflcaion  ;  A  I  thefe  and  the  l\e 
Obje^iont  vanifh  \  becaufe  -we  are  not  ^u/fifiedby/Atth^  as  fffftifi' 
Cation  u  confidered a^ively^butpajfivelf, 

Anf^.  I.  I  yet  think  that  I  have  faid  enough  In  my  private 
Papers  to  \ou,  to  confute  the  conceit  of  faith's  being  PafTivc. 
2.  If  I  had  not,  yet  you  v>cldme  whati  dcfire  :  f  fai^h  »A 
nor,  but  luft:r,  to  our  Juftifjcation,  then  is  ic  no  efficient  IpIVju- 
mcntalcauie.  Forall  true  efficiency  is  by  Adion.  And  *o  you 
keep  but  a  Metaphorical  Inlkumcnt.  But  of  this  more  hereafter. 

N  2  Treat. 


(po 


Treat,  pag  \jifi,  PVe  cannot  call  Remlf  ion  of  fin  a  fiAte\aiWi 
calljufi  ficauon. 

Ar.fiv.  T  do  not  believe  you  :  and  I  can  bring  many  Scripturei 
againftyou.  Tut  to  your  felf  its  enough  to  ask  ,  How  can  yoa 
conftantly  make  Rcmifiion  an  Effencial  part  of  Juftificacion9 
and  yet  fay,  that  we  cannot  call  it  a  ftate,  as  we  do  Juftification. 
In  your  firft  Treat,  of  Juft.  Le6l.  i7.;>-«^^.H5-  youfay,/'r<>;>.4. 
Remifllon  is  not  to  be  confidercd  meerly  as  removing  of 
evil,  butalfo  asbeftowinggood.  It  is  not  only  ahlativamali^ 
but  coiUtiva  boni^  \  plenufulvouchfafing  of  many  gracious  fa- 
vours to  us,  fuch  as  a  vSon-fhip,  and  a  Right  to  eternal  life,  as 
alfo  peace  with  God ,  and  communion  with  him.  ]  And  why 
may  we  not  fay,  [  A  fiate  of  Sonfliip  or  falvation  J  as  well  as 
of  Juaification  ? 

Treat,  ib.  There  is  a  Juflt fixation  of  the  CAufe^  and  of  the  per' 
fon^  alwAtes  to  he  dijiinguijhed. 

Anfw,  There  isno  Juftification  of  his  caufe,  which  doth  not 
fofar  juft, fie  the  perfun :  Nor  any  fentential  Juftirtcation  of  the 
perfon ,  butby  juftifyinghis  caufe.  Though  his  adions  may 
notbe  juftifiable;  yet  when  the  caufe  to  be  tryed  is,  Whether 
finful  adions  be  pardoned  by  Chnft,  that  caufe  muft  be  juftiti- 
cd  ,  if  that  man  be  juftified.  Even  as  Accufations  are  not 
charged  upon  the  perfon,  without  fome  caufe  real  or  pre- 
tended. 

Treat,  pag.  152.  NotonlyBucer^X'hoiskaio'A'ntoplaceJu/ii- 
fication  both  in  Imputedriohteottfnefs  ani  Inherent^  thereby  endea* 

vouringa  Reconciliation  rvtththe  Papifit '  But  Calvin  //'.  3. 

cap.  17.  fe6i.  8. ^  Tothispurpofe  alfo  Zanchy . 

Anfvc,  Why  then  might  not  I  have  had  as  fair  meafure  as 
Lud.  de  7)««,  Bucer^  Calvin^  Zanchy  ?  efpecially  when  1  go  not 
fo  far.  And  yet  I  take  my  felf  beholden  to  gut/.  Rivet ,  for 
helping  mc  to  fome  fcraps  of  Phii.  Codnrcus^  who  drives  at  this 

mark. 


(P3) 

mark,  as  you  fay  Bucer  doth,  though  I  cannot  yet  get  the  Book 
it  fclf. 

Treat,  pag.  158.  O  this  u  txctllent,  when  a  man  w  umAx^ed 
and  in  an  hoi)  manner  confonndei  at  hn  holinefs  ,  as  ^ell  as  at  his 
offinces- 

Anfw.  So  you  before  fay  ,  they  muft  be  afhamed  of  their 
Righteoufnefs  as  well  as  iheir  fins.  I  do  not  well  underftand 
ihefediftindions.  Nothing  in  all  the  world  confoundcth  me  fo 
much  as  the  imperfection  of  my  Holinefs  :  But  I  dare  not  think 
that  imperfection  to  be  no  fin,  left  I  muft  think  the  perfection 
to  be  no  duty,  and  fo  come  to  works  of  fupercrrogation  and 
Evangelical  Counfels.  And  Holinefs  confidered  in  it  felf,  and 
not  as  finful  and  imperfect ,  is  amiable  in  my  eyes,  and  I  know 
not  how  fo  be  afhamed  of  it,  without  being  afhamed  of  God 
that  is  its  object  and  exemplar,  and  heaven  that  is  the  ftace  of  its 
perfection. 

Treat,  ib.  Setfomife^^  even  a  remnant  aftJe^  comparativelj  , 
the  whole  (^hrifiUn  world  hoth  ^oSlors  and  people,  learned  and  un^ 
learned,  fajien  on  a  fttjltjj cation  b)  work/* 

Anfw.  I  hope  not  fo  many  as  you  fear,  or  affirm.  Firft  ,  all 
the  Doctors  and  people  of  your  judgement  do  not  ;  And  if 
you  thought  thofc  fo  excecdmg  few  among  Chriftians,  vou 
would  not  take  me  for  fo  fingulnr  as  you  do.  2.  None  of  the 
truly  fanctified  are  fuch  as  you  here  affirm.  3.  The  multitude  of 
groundlcfs  prcfumers  of  Free  Grace  arc  not  fuch.  And  truly 
though  I  doubt  Jufticiaries  are  too  common,  I  do  not  think  that 
fuch  Prefumptuous  ones  are  fo  fmall  a  Rerananr,  4.  The  Li- 
bertines and  Antinomians,  and  many  other  Sects  of  their  mind, 
are  none  of  this  great  number.  5.  I  will  yet  hope  for  all  this, 
that  you  cannot  prove  ic  of  the  Doctors  and  people  of  half  the 
Chriftian  world.  Their  hearts  God  knows.  And  I  will  not  yet 
believe  that  in  their  Doctrine  about  Juftificationby  works,  the 
Greek  Churches, the  ^rraemans,  Jacobites  jCopti's,  Abafincs, 
&c.  do  faften  on  fuch  dangerous  lands,  or  differ  fo  muchfroni 

you.. 


you.  6.  I  heard  as  eminent  Divines  as  moft  I  know  ((omeytl 
living)  m  a  publick  meeting  fay  ,  that  B  Oiop  V/her  and  Mr. 
(74t*)^fr  artirmtd,  that  the  Papifls  did  not  lundamentallj  differ 
from  us  in  the  Doctrme  of  Juft.fication. 

Treat,  pag.  167.  ByAUthefejubttU  DJlinBionsy  men^ohU 
ht  thought' 

Arj"^.  Your  fcope  in  that  page  feems  to  be  againft  any  diftin- 
gulhipgwhatfoevcr  about  worKs,  jn  this  propoficion  ,  iVe  ure 
iu(iifiedhj  faith,  andnvt  hj  worki  y  IT  fo  ,  that  we  muft  not  run 
to  any  diftindion,  but  fay  that  in  every  motion  or  fenfe.  Works 
are  excluded  J  and  dcjuft:fie  in  none,  then  I  profefsit  ispaitmy 
uttmoit  sk  11  to  jutt  fie  you  for  accufing  /^/t/j^wrr  as  you  do,  for 
faying,  Menttm  Jacobe  in  curtit  tunm  :  Yea  if  he  had  upon  the 
reading  of  Mat.  12.  36.  rifen  higher,  and  faid,  Afemirt^Chri^ 
fie  in  caput  tuum.  For  furehechat  faith  \^B)  thy  words  thou 
/halt  hejtiflif^ed  ~}  Or  by  rvork '  a  man  *.-  ju/f  fi'd-,  an4  not  by.fatth 
only  1  can  no  way  toffibly  beexculed  from  that  crime,  if  nodi- 
ftinftion  may  verifie  bis  words ;  bu:  they  muft  then  be  taken  as 
abfoluteiy  faife  :  which  I  will  not  be  perfwaded  of. 

Treat,  pag.  21^.  Scrm  i^.Obferv.  That  even  the  mo  [I  holy 
And  re^ercate  man  u  not  Ju/lifiea  bj  the  veotkj  of  grace  which  he 
doth.  Tkit  truth  « the  mart  diligently  to  be  ajferted^  by  hoxv  much 
the  err  ox  that  confronts  it  ia  more  fpecious  and  refined  ,  an^  main' 
tained  by  fitch  ^bettorfyVfhofe  refute  is  net  fo  eafilj  cafl  cff  m  the 
former  ^efpakf  of. 

Now  you  come  purpofelyil  perceive  to  deal  with  me.  I  con- 
fefs  the  repute  of  Abettors  doth  much  to  bear  up  opinions 
through  the  world,  even  with  them  that  fpeak  moit  againft  im- 
plicit faith.  But  you  need  not  defpair  of  cafting  off  the  repute 
of  them  you  mention.  Mr.  Robert fon  and  Mr.  Crandon  can  teacb 
any  man  that  will  learn  that  leffon. 

Treat,  ib.  The  fyeffionismt  ^  ivhether  fae  are  ^uftified  by 
^orkj^  though  fiomng  from  grace,  us  meritorious  or  efficient  of  fw 

Jiification. 


(91') 


flificdt'lcn.  This  the  Ofiikmfis  rve  h4ve  to  deal  with,  do  rrjeSt 
Vfith  ind'^natioK.  To  make  ^^orl^t  either  merits  or  efficient  cnufes 
of  our  Inft ideation  before  Gad ,  the]/  £''^*^  '^  direEll^  to  opfofe  the 
Scrptttret ;  jiea  they  feem  to  be  offended  ruth  the  Otthgdox^  as  gU 
viKgfoomuch  to  faith  ^  becanfeits  made  an  !njlrument  of  our  Ih~ 
fltfication',  therefore  they  are  to  be  acquitted  at  leafl  from  grofs 
Poperj. 

t/inftv.  This  is  one  pafTige  which  I  undcrHand  by  your  Pre- 
face to  you  Sermons  on  John  17.  you  lookt  for  thanks  for  ;  and 
I  do  freely  thank  you  for  it :  for  the  world  is  fuch  now  ,  as  that 
1  muft  take  my  felf  beholden  to  any  man  that  doth  injure  me 
with  moderation  and  modefty.  But  you  might  have  done  than 
juftice  to  us  Opinionifts,  as  to  have  put  [  any  caufes  at  all  ]  in- 
ftead  of  [  efficient  cjtHjes  ^  when  we  had  fo  often  told  you 
( the  Orthodox  )  that  we  difclaimed  all  true  caufality  ^  and 
then  your  Reader  would  have  been  ready  to  hope  that  we  are 
free  alfo  from  the  finer  Popery  as  well  as  the  grofs.  But  fince  I 
have  heard  of  late  times,  what  it  is  that  goes  under  the  name  of 
Antichriftianity  and  Popery  ,  even  with  many  that  arc  able  to 
call  themfclves  Orthodox,  and  others  that  diflcnt  from  them  , 
worfe  then  Opinionifts  j  I  confefs  I  begin  to  have  charitable 
thoughts  of  a  man  that  is  but  freed  from  the  charge  of  grofs 
Popery  :  and  if  thofe  tongues  Qiould  free  him  alfo  from  the  im- 
putation of  all  the  finer  Popery,  I  (houjd  begin  to  fufped  that 
fomewhat  is  amifs. 

Treat,  ib.  2.  Although  to  tn*intain  faith  4»d ObedieMce  to  be 
the  condtioKS  andaciufa.  fine  qua  non  of  our  Jujiification^  be  thi 
profeffcd  and  avowed  Do^lrine  of  the  Socinians^  yet  fame  of  late 
have  averted  the  fame   DoSinne  ^   th*t  Jiet    abhor    Sccinian^ 

ifm ' . 

jittf^\  For  this  alfo  T  give  you  the  thanks  which  you  exped- 
ed,  on  the  forefaid  grounds.  But  if  we  aflert  the  fame  Doctrine 
with  the  Socinians ,  eitherit  is  thefime/Oi//'*  Dodrine  ,  or  the 
fame  found  Dodrine.  If  the  later,  you  might  as  well  have  faid , 
the  Socinians  afTerc  that  there  is  a  Cod,  aodfodo  we  :  but  to 

what 


(pO 


what  purpofe  ?  If  the  former ;  then  cither  it  is  falfe  ijuoaJ  ter" 
ntmos,  or  ^Hoad  (tnfum.  The  former  cannot  be  faid  without 
abfurdicy  ;  the  words  can  have  no  other  falfnefs,  but  anunfit- 
refs,  diiiinfl  from  the  fen  e  ;  And  if  the  terms  be  any  part  of 
Socinianifn,  then  Chr.ft  and  famei  were  guilty  of  Socini^" 
nifm  -^(jttodahfif.  If  it  be  the  fenfe  ,  Firft.  I  crave  nootherfa- 
vourof  the  impartial  Reader,  before  he  judge,  then  to  read 
the  ScciKtAnj  explication  of  themfelvc,  and  to  read  my  expli- 
cation here,  and  in  my  confeflion.  Secondly,  And  if  he  will 
alfo  perufe  the  Allegations  in  the  end  of  that  confeli]on,Iet  him 
judge  whether  the  Orthodox  be  not  guilty  of  SociniaK'fn.  Or 
if  he  be  tempted  to  believe  Dr  •OlV/'jjiintimation^  as  if  I  had 
dealt  injurioufl/  with  the  Authors  there  alleadged,  I  only  delire 
him  to  turn  to  the  places  cited,  and  perufe  them  m  the  Authors, 
and  freely  cenfure  me. 

Treat.    220.  Neither  is  thetjUejlion  about  tke  neceffitj  of  ho- 

lirefs,    &c. Only  the  ^uefiiot*  u  upon  what  account 

theft  are  required  in  juftifted  perfons  ;  whether  »«/ow^caufaUty,  er 
concurrence  as  fait  his  ^  only  not^'ithjuch  a  degree  of  txcelltncyt 
PVbether good  ^orkj  he  requiredai  "iveU asfdtth,  fo  that  tt-f  maj  fay^ 
JH'ttfying  Repentancei  j«/?'X.'*\?  LaW^  (  Love  it  Jhould  he ) 
as  well  as  jujitjying  fatth  ?  This  is  pofitivelj  and  vehmently 
nffrmedhy  fome  :  but  certainly  thofe  "'irguments  and  Reafotithhey 
bring  are  too  Wr<«/^  to  £ainfay  the  Torrent  of  the  Orthodox 
Divines. 

Anfvo.  Upon  the  reading  of  this  I  complained  of  hard  mea- 
fure  in  the  Preface  to  my  confef<ion  :  to  v/hich  you  reply  forae- 
what  in  your  Preface  to  Sermons  on  Johnij.  1  (hall  recite 
the  reafons  of  my  complaint.  Firft,  I  did  both  at  large  in 
private  writing*;  to  your  ielf,  and  publiquely  to  the  world,  pro- 
fcfs  that  I  took  neither  faith  nor  works  for  any  caufes  at  all  of 
ourjuft  fication  j  was  it  juft  thenio  maketl  is  the  liate  of  the 
Qiicition ,  andliyl  pofinvely  and  vehemently  affirmed  it  ? 
(  forv'U  deny  n')t  that  it  is  me  that  you  mean,  and  I  knowic 
by  pafT^ges  here  :grec  tblr  '^o  your  private  letters  )  Secondly,  I 
never  once  imagined  the  difference  between  faith  and  holy  obe- 
dience 
4 


CP7) 


dience  or  fanctification,  to  lie  (  in  order  to  Juftificatlon  )  in 
the  degree  of  excellency.  I  never  ro  my  remembrance  fo  thought, 
or  wrote,or  fpoke.     But  the  difference  Ilaid  here,  firft,  That 
(  as  lO  actual  obedience,  yea  and  Repentance )  faith  hath  a  pe- 
culiar aptitude  to  this  office,  as  being  a  Receptive  act,  and  fit- 
ed  to  the  objecr,as  that  object  is  fitted  to  our  necefsicy.  Second- 
ly, ThatC  astoaflent,  dcfire  of  Chrift,  love  to  Chrift  offered, 
accepting  him  as  Teacher,  and  Lord  )  they  are  eflential  acts  of 
faith, and  fo  differ  not  at  all,as  they  are  by  many  fuppofed  to  do. 
Nay,I  rather  expected  that  fome  fliould  have  charged  me  with 
preferring  Holinefs  before  faith  inexccilency,while  I  made  faith 
but  thefeed,and  holynefs  as  the  fruit;  faith  to  be  but  the  cove- 
nanting, and  Obedience  the  performance  of  what  we  confented 
to  •,  and  in  a  word,while  I  made  perfect  holinefs  the  end  of  faith, 
becaufe  the  end  is  better  then  the  means:    And  I  was   glad 
when  I  found  you  faying  the  like,  f^irJlc.  Legu^LeSl.  4.  fug. 
45*  C  ^  ^  ■  Holinffj  ^»d  Gq4Unffs  inlstrentit4  the  etid  of  Faith  and 
jufiification.  1  But  little  did  I  think  to  have  been  charged,  and 
that  by  you,  for  making  the  diflfcrence  to  lie  in  faiths  higher  de- 
gree  of  excellency  ,  gnd  only  in  that.     Thirdly ,  I    never 
owned  the  phrafe  of  [  jufiifpng  RepentaKStf  jujlif)i»g  Love~\ 
nor  ever  faid  that  we  may  as  well  ufc  thefe  as  \']t*jiif)i»g  fuith'2 
And  when  none  of  thefe  things  were  ever  faid  or  written  by  me, 
ought  you  to  have  left  on  record  tO'  Generations ,  that  [  thi^ 
is  fofit'tvtly  arj  vthimently    ajfirmed.  3  On  the  confiderati- 
on  of  this  dealing ,  I  muft  fay  again,  O  what  is  man  ,  and  what 
a  fad  cafe  were  we  in, if  the  bcft  of  men  were  our  Judges !  when 
they  will  not  ftick  deliberately  to  publiOi  to  the  prefent  and  fu- 
ture Ages,  thit  we  pofitively  and  vehement  ly  afHrmihok  things, 
which  we  never  thought  nor  wrote,  but  have  by  Letters  and  in 
printed  books  both  pofitively  and  vehemently,  &  very  frequent- 
ly profeffed  the  contrary.     Is  here  any  room  for  further  dif- 
puting  ?  yea,  when  I  have  told  you  of  this  dealing,  you  own  it 
llill,  and  defend  it  in  your  Preface  to  your  Sermons   on  fohn 
17.1  (lull  therefore  before  i  proceed,  examine  that  Defence. 

Preface.  pa{r.     5.     [|  Now  when  I  had    endeavoured  to 
ft  t,'  the  Qucliion  in  a  moft  candid  and  fair  way  between  thole 

O  that 


tbat  f'eny  a  ['onclUiotifre  <j'fa  r.on  of  our  Juftification,  and  tbofe 
who  fffi-m.  A  Reverend  and  Learned  Brother,  judging  himfelf 
concerned  in  this  opinion  likewife,  deth  complain  of  the  want 
of  Candor  and  truth  in  my  liatingof  the  Queftion ,  when  1 

Mther  expeded  thanks  for  my  Ingenuity  :  Now  let  any 

Judicious  Reader,  that  is  acquainted  with  controvcrfic,  de- 
cide ,  wherein  any  Candor  or  truth  may  be  de'.ircd  here.  For 
I  fay  Q  Cf<uJaLtj  ]  which  is  a  general  word,  not  efficiency 
or  merit;  Again,  I  fay,  fome  caufality  ,  CaufdUtas  tjHadam^ 
which  is  terminus  diminHens :  yea  I  added  the  word  Concurrence^ 
which  might  fatisfie  any  how  low  I  broughc  the  Queftion. 

t//«/wfr. Will  you  call  to  any  judicious  Reader ^to  tell  you  that 
whichlparticularly  expreft  toyou?  Again,  Then  let  the  judi- 
cious Reader  judge  whether  you  fhould  have  faid  to  the  world» 
any  of  the  forementioned  particulars  j  Firft,  That  I  give  any 
Caufality  to  works  as  to  Juftification.    Secondly,  Or  that  I 
difference  them  only  in  degree  of  excellency.     Thirdly  ,  Or 
that  I  affirm,  that  we  may  fay,  juftifying  Repentance,  juftify- 
ing  Love.as  well  as  juftifying  faith.  Fourthly,  And  this  is  affirmed 
pofitively,  and  vehemently  :  and  all  this  when  I  had  pofitively 
and  vehemently  denyed  them.  Fifthly,  Yea,  and  that  only  this  is 
the  queftion  between  us. 

And  what  do  your  defences  do  to  juftifie  fuch  dealing '  []  you 
(2i'\d  on\y  Caufality  in  general,   and  not  Efficiency  or  A^ferit  ] 
And  did  not  I  openly  and  privately  to  you  deny  Caufality  in 
general,  and  not  only  A'ferit  or  Efficiency  ?  and  is  that  pofitive 
or  vehement  affirming  '\i>  Secondly;  you  (zidfCaufaliias  cfuaclanty 
which  is  terminus  dimtnuens.']  1  f  quoad  ejfe  caufahtatu  it  bc  termi- 
tiHs  dimtnuens,    then  the  meaning  is,ihat  I  make  them  no  caufes. 
But  do  you  think  any  Reader  will  Eng\\(h  Caufalitas<jU(iidamt 
byQ«o  Caufality']  But   doubtlefs  you  mean  that    it  is  Ter" 
minus  dtminuenszi  to  the  quilty  or  nobility  of  thecaufe.   But 
fitft,  I  never  heard  before  that  (juaciam  was  terminm  dim:nutns\ 
and  if  no  Readers  muft  underftasd  you,  but  thofe  that  know 
this  to  be  true*  1  think  it  will  bc  but  few.    Secondly,  But  what 
if  that  were  fo  .?  Did  you  not  know  that  1  denyed  even  o// r4»- 
faity,^  bow  diminute  foever  ^uajam  can  exprefs,  if  it  be  but 

rcal^ 


Cpp) 

real.  Thirdly,  Bnc  you  added  i  CiacH^rtnei  1  But  ic  was 
in  Concurrence  with  the  fcveral  unju  t  pifliges  before  mention- 
ed :  and  fare  che  neighbour- hood  of  that  word  hath  not  force 
enough  to  make  them  all  true. 

Preface.  [  CMy  Revtrend  "Brother  faith  ,  He  vtbtmentlf 
difcUimeth  all  CAufalitj  of  tt'orly  in  Ju[ti^cation  :  JHrelj  hid 
meaning  ia  all  proper  caufal  ejfcteney  ^  and  f$  did  Hn  the  (I  Ming  of 
it'.  B tit  to  deny  Caufalityin  a  large ( en fe^  is  t9  contradiU  him- 

cyfftf^er.  Iffo,  what  hope  of  Juftice  ?  Mufti  in  papcc 
after  paper  difclaim  ail  true  Caufalicy  ,  and  will  you  not  on- 
ly pcrfwade  the  world  of  the  contrary  ,  but  perdft  in  it ,  whe- 
ther I  will  or  not,  and  fay  I  mean  a  [  proptr  caufal  efficiency  I  ] 
Reader,  I  have  no  other  remedy  left,  but  to  advife  thee,  chac 
if  yet  after  this  it  be  affirmed  ^the  next  time  that  I  dif- 
ciaim  not  all  true  caufality.or  mean  not  as  I  fay,thou  believe  not 
the  affirmation. 

Preface.  [  For  in  kit  Aphorif.  74.  Thef  They  both^a. 
Faith  and  fVorkt  jftfiifie  in  the  fame  kjndof  canfalitj  ,  ormedi* 
ate  it  (  (honld  be  medi4,)aMd improper  caujestor  as  Dr. TVeift  caufx 
difp'fifivac ,  6ftt  with  this  difference  ,  Faith  at  the  principal^ 
Obedience  as  the  left  principa/.  Here  it  caftfalitj,  though  im- 
proper ;  Here  ii  a  caufa  difpofitiva  :  andjetfhall  I  be  blamed  after 
I  hndremoved  Efficiency  and  Merit i 

Anf^er.  Thisis  but  toadd  injufticeto  injuftice.  When  I 
have  written  at  large  that  faith  and  works  are  no  true  caufes  of 
Juftification,  and  after  tell  you  that  a  condition  is  commonly 
called  caufa  fine  qut  non^  which  is  caufa  fatua ,  and  no  caufe 
at  all,but  meerly  nominal,having  by  cuftom  obtained  that  name, 
and  that  Dr.  Twijs  calls  this  caufi  difpofuiva  :  when  I  fay  that 
they  have  only  a  caufality  improperly  fo  called,  which  indeed  is 
nocaufaiity.  Is  it  juftice  for  you  fiillto  perfwade  the  world 
t\)it  I  man  feme  caufilit^,  though  noiefficitncj?  The  thing  I 
renounce-.the  name  is  not  it  that  you  only  charge  me  with .-   if 

O  2  yoi* 


^ 


(lOo) 

you  had,  I  was  not  the  maker  of  It.    It  was  c^WidcmfaJtue 
ijH^  non,  before  I  was  born  :  I  muft  comply  with  common  lan- 
gmge,  Of  ^•^  Tilcnt :  efpecial  y  wlien  I  tell  yoii^  I  take  it  forno 
Caule.     You  give  me  (uch  juftice  as  the  hoa't  of  tlie  Crown 
Tavern  in  C^fi«;-/»'/^ had,  who  (  as  S^eed  faith,)  was  hanged 
for  faying  merrily,  that  his  Son  was  Heir  of  the  Crown,  and 
his  expoiition  would  not  favchisl.fe.  I  pray  you  hereafter  re- 
move more  then  Efficiency  and  Merit.     I  take  not  worksto  be 
either  the  matewal  or  formal  caufe  of  Juftification,  no  nor  the 
fin.il,  though  you(in  the  words  before  cited  )  affirm  it  fuch.Who 
then  gives  more  to  works,  you  or  I  ?  The  final  caufe  is  focal- 
led,  becaufe  iccaufeth  us  cochoofe  the  means  zn  it  j  Juftifica- 
tion is  not  a  meansof  ourufHig,but  anad  of  God.Thercfore 
works  are  not  properly  the  end  of  it, as  to  us. 

And  yet  let  me  fay  this  to  you,lett  you  fhouldmiftake  me :  As 
vehemently  as  I  difown  all  true  caufality  of  works  to  our  Juftifi- 
cation,! intend  not  to  fall  out  with  all  men  that  call  them  caufes. 
As  firft.  Not  with  PlfcMer  nor  fuch  other  that  call  them  caufes 
of  our  final  abfolution  and  falvation.Secondly,  Nor  with  ihofc 
that  call  them  meritorious  in  the  fame  fenfc  as  the  Fathers  did, 
though  they  unfitly  ufe  the  word.  Thirdly,  Nor  with  thofe 
that  will  fay,  that  becaufe  they  pleafe  God,  and  fo  are  the  ob- 
]zS(  of  his  comphcency  and  will ,  they  may  therefore, fpeaking 
after  the  manner  of  menjl^e  called  Procatarhike  caufes  of  his  ad 
of  Juftification:  and  fo  that  the  Acniablenefs  and  defirablenefs 
of  faith  and  holinefs,  is  the  caufe  why  he  affigned  them  to  this 
Noble  place  fnd  office.  Fourthly,  Nor  with  them  that  fay, 
faith  is  a  moral  or  a  Metaphorical,  paffive  or  adive  Inftrument 
of  ]  uftification.  Though  I  fay  not  as  thefe  men,  I  will  not  quar- 
rel with  them. 

Preface.    Bnt  1  need  not  run  to  this  ;    for  my  ty^rguments 
militate  againjl  ^orkj  %  st  Vl>ork,s  jifji*fji»g  under  ^ny  pretended^ 
Notion  ^'hztfoever. 

Anfxver.  By  the  help  of  this,  I  (hall  interpret  all  your  Ar- 
guments. And  if  fo,then  they  militate  againft  the  ad  of  faith 
Juftifying  under  the  pretended  notion  of  an  Inftrument,  unlcfs 

you 


you  will  fay  that  faith  is  no  Ad,  or  Inftrumentality  isnoprc- 
tcoded  notion.  ? 

Preface.  And  thu  maketh  me  admire  ho^  my  learned  Brother 
could  let  fall  one  pajfa^e  Vi'herein  he  way  be  fo  filpuhly  andocuUrlf 
cenvincedto  the<:ontrary  by  the  fir Jl  hol^Kg  upon  my  Arguments  ; 
that  ^^hich  he  fAith  «  {_  the  ftrength  of  my  -Arguments,  lies  up- 
on a  fpippofitton^  that  conditions  have  a  moral  efficiency  1 

There  t4  no  one  of  thefe  ten  Argtitnems  hr ought  againfl  fujli^ca- 
ticnby  ^orks,  as  <a  Condition  fine  qua  non,  that  n  built  upon 
thuffippofttton,  or  hath  any  dependance  on  it^  only  in  the  fourth  Ay^ 
gument  after  their  firength  is  delivered  ,  J  do  ^x  abundant!, 
/^jev  that  n  Condition  in  a  (Covenant  JlriBlj  tak^en  hath  a  moral 
efficiency. 

Anfwcr.  Firft,  You  confcfsit  isyour  Aflertion,  thatfuch 
Conditions  have  a  moral  efficiency.  Secondly,  I  never  faid 
that  you  made  that  a  Medium  in  all  your  Arguments,  nor  that 
you  intended  that  as  their  ftrength  ;  but  that  their  ftrength  jycth 
on  that  fuppofition  :  and  if  I  have  miftaken  in  that,  I  will  not 
ftand  in  it  :  But  I  think  to  fhew  you  that  without  that  fup- 
pofition your  Arguments  have  no  ftrength :  which  if  I  do,  then 
judge  at  what  you  marvailed. 

But  its  a  farther  ad  of  injuftice  in  you,  in  alleadging  mc  Afol. 
pag.  8,  faying  that  fome  conditions  are  impulfive  caufes,  when 
I  told  you  it  is  not  ^ua  conditions,  but  only  as  materially  there 
is  foraewhat  in  them  that  is  meritorious.  I  doubt  not  but  the 
fame  thing  may  be  the  matter  of  a  caufe  and  a  conditi- 
on. 

I  (hall  now  return  to  your  Led.  of  Juflification,  andtherC' 
fpeak  to  the  other  paffagc  in  your  preface,  about  juftifying  Re- 
pentance and  Love,  &c. 

Treat,  pag.  220.  [  This  therefore  I  p:al  (  god  viUiyg) 
undertake  to  prove,  that  good  wo^kj  are  not  a  con^itioriy  or  a  caula 
fine  qua  none/  our  '^  h  jit  i feat  ion. 

<    Anfrver,.  But  remember  that  icisjuftification,  either  as  be 


gun  in  confticatioa  ,  or  continued  ,  or  as  pronounced  by  the 
Judges  Sentence,  that  the  Qucftion  compr^endeth,and  not  on- 
ly the  putting  us  into  a  j  iftitied  Rate  ^  And  its  works  under  any 
notion  that  you  fpeak  of,  and  not  only  under  the  redupiicatioiii 
<jt4fi  works. 

Treat,  p.221.  Firfi  TfhaUinfianct  in  the  grt At  pattern  and  eX' 
ample  of  our  ffifftficatioa,  Abraham  j  from  ^hom  the  Apojilt 
conclfidethaff^fitficationof  aWBilievers  in  the  like  manner  he 
VPM.  Note  that  Abr&hdim  vfas  not /unified  hj^orkj,  orhuivork^ 
ing^  though  a  godl)  man^  the  Apofile^  &C. 

Anfw,  I.  I  diftinguifti  between  works  in  Pauls  fenfe,  and 
vforkj  in  lames  his  fenfe.  And  becaufe  you  fay  fo  much  againft 
diftinguifliing  of  works ,  (  before  )  as  deceitful  ^  I  will  firft 
prove  the  ncceffity  of  diftinguiOiing.  i .  Works  in  Fault  fenfe 
are  fuch  as  make  the  Reward  10  be  not  of  Grace,  but  of  Debt. 
Works  in /«ir»«  his  fenfe  are  not  fuch  :  therefore  they  are  not 
the  fame.  Works  in  P<»«// fenle ,  ^rtnHiontatialu^hli  cfftr- 
td  to  God ,  and  juflifying  by  their  value  But  works  in  lamet 
his  fenfe,  are  none  fuch.  Proved-  The  works  that  7<9w«/ fpeaks 
of  muft  neceflarily  be  done .-  Works  in  Pauls  fenfe,  we  may  not 
fo  much  as  imagine  that  we  can  do  ;  vi:^.  fuch  as  make  the  Re» 
ward  of  Debt,  and  not  of  Grace.  Though  the  matter  of  fuch 
works  may  be  done,  which  Judiciaries  thus  conceive  of,  yet  un- 
der fuch  a  notion,no  man  may  once  imagine  that  be  hath  them. 

2.  Works  in  Pauls  fenfe  are  fuch  as  Band  in  competition  with 
Chrift,  or  It  leaft,  would  be  co- partners  with  him  in  a  co-ordi- 
nation, ijut  works  in  James  his  fenfe  are  none  fuch  ,  but  fuch 
as  ftand  in  a  due  fubordination  to  Chrift  j  fuch  undoubtedly 
there  are  :  And  fuch  fames  fpeaks  of- 

That  Paul  fpeaks  of  works  as  Competitors  with  Chrift,  or  as 
co-ordinate,  an  hundred  Texts  will  prove;  and  the  cafe  is  fo 
plain,  that  I  think  it  not  worth  the  infilling  on ,  feeing  the  im- 
partial reading  over  the  Epiftles  may  fatisfie< 

2. 1  diftinguifh  of  ]ujitfpr:g^  ^uoad  modum  precurandi^  or  of 
thediftindlnterefts  of  mens  anions  therein,  fignified  m  the 
prepofition  Z^J-l     J""*'  fpeaks    of  Juftification  Z^)2 

works, 


(lo?) 


works  ,  as  hy  valu^hle  deferving  caufes,  or  procatar- 
dike  caufes ,  moving  Gcd  to  juftihe  U8  by  their  worth  , 
or  by  feme  true  caufality;>rccftr;K^it.  But  /atres  fpeaks  of 
Works  as  fuppofing  the  perfcd  Saiisfe<3ion  and  Merit  of  C  hrift, 
and  that  all  that  is  valuable  to  the  caufal  procurement  of  our 
Juflification  is  to  be  found  in  him  alone,  and  therefore  he  leaves 
no  caufality  herein  to  woiks  :  but  takes  them  as  a  meer  condi- 
tion, which  ceafe  fufpending  when  performed.  For  the  c  fficien- 
cy  of  a  condition,  is  only  in  fufpending  till  performed  :  And 
fo  Rebellion  can  (ufpend  ^  when  the  ceafing  of  that  Rebellion 
by  obedience,  doth  not  caufe,  but  only  ceafe  fufpending. 

Now  I  anfwer  to  your  Minor ^  that  Abraham  was  not  juftifi- 
ed  by  works  in  ?«<»// fenfe,  but  he  was  in  Jama's  fenfe,  unlefs 
you  wil!  own  the  fajing  which  you  chide  Althamtr  for. 
(  Though  I  muft  fay  that  in  his  Cor.ctlUtiones  Lcc.  Sctit.  y^l- 
ri(?<«wfr  deals  more  mannerly  with  \amts.  )  Abraham  was  not 
juflified  by  works ,  as  making  the  Reward  of  debt ,  and  not  of 
grace  :  for  he  had  no  fuch  works  :  But  Abraham  was  jullified 
I.  By  the  act  of  faith,  as  a  condition  :  therefore  by  an  act 
under  feme  notion.  I  l<now  of  few  Divines  that  deny  that  faith 
is  a  condition  of  Juflification.  2.  However  you  confeft  your 
felf  that^^r<«/^<?wwas  Juflifiedby  faichas  an  inftrument  :  and 
youfay  that  it  was  by  the  act  of  faith  (^  and  not  the  habit,  j  And 
chough  you  take  this  to  be  but  a  nominal  act ,  and  really  a  Paf- 
fion  ,  yet  fo  do  not  others :  for  herein  you  are  more  fingular 
C  athoufand  toone,  asfaraslam  able  to  underftand  j  then  I 
amintheDoccrine  which  you  charge  with  fingularity.  3.  The 
faith  that  Abrahimvjz^  juftificd  by,  was  not  only  a  bare  appre- 
henfionof  ChriftsRighceoufnefs,  but  a  receiving  of  Chril^  as 
Chrift,  which  is  called,  ^^orj^z,  by  your  party.  4.  It  was  cither 
Bi  or  BecAufe  of  his  External  Obedience,  that  Abrah/im  was  ju- 
ftified.  Proved,  i  By /^-wt;  2.  21.  Wasnot /^^r^j^^wour  Fa- 
ihc!r  juftificd  by  works  ,  when  he  liad  offered  Ifaac  his  fon  up- 
onlhe  Altar  ?  2.  From(7f».  22.  12,  16,  18.  Bjmyftlf  have 
f  fworn  faith  the  Lor  dy  for  becafifethonhafi  done  th's  things  and 
haft  riot  w  th-htUthjfoK,  thine  only  fon,  that  in  ble/py.^l  wUlblefi 
thec^  &c.  Ani^  in  thy  fttd  pjall  all  the  Nations  of  the  earth  be  blef- 
jed^  becwje  thou  hajl  obejtd my  voice,.  But  then  I  muft  add,  that 

tbifr 


(104-) 

this  was  none  of  Abrak.i>«t  hrft  Juftificition,  for  be  was  juft  be- 
fore this ;  but  It  was  a  renewed  Acceprance  and  Approbation 
of  God,  and  a  kind  of  fentential  Declaration  thereof,  by  the 
voice  of  the  Angel.  But  a  Jurtiiication  it  was,  andfo/<iWf/ 
calls  it. 

Now  let  us  hear  your  Replies. 

Treat,  pag.  221.  This  cannot  be  a  [olid  Aiafyer.  i.  'BtCAuft 
the  i^ f of} le  fpeaketio  generally  of  xvorkj  in  tkit  dtfcriftion  of  /«- 
Jiification^  though  in  other  places  he  fometimesfaith^ihe  works  of 
the  Law^;ff  Abraham  could  not  be  I>sfiancedinfor  fuch  Vforkx , 

&C. IVben  )fre  read  the  Helj  (j  ho [i  f pake  generally  of  all 

>dcforks  ^  wh  are  ^e  that  "^^e  fhould  limit  it  to  fame  ? — « 

'Bj  their  interpretation,  the  believir  (hoftld  be  oppofed  only  to  fome 
kind  of  works  and  fait  kj  Sec. 

Anf^.  I,  Theordinaryftrainof  the  Apoftles  fpeech,  being 
cxpreflive  of  the  xvorkf  0/ f  ^^  Z^^w,  is  Expofitory  of  the  reft, 

1.  Becaufe  a  few  paflages  muft  be  ufually  expounded  by  many. 

2.  Andbecaufca  few  (much  more  abundance  of^  limiting 
paflages,  muft  expound  thofe  where  the reftriftion is  not  ex- 
prefled. 

2.  Have  not  I  ever  yielded  to  you  that  all  works  are  excluded 
from  Juftifying  at  works  ?  but  it  follows  not  that  therefore  they 
are  (as you  may  fay)  excluded  under  any  Notion  whatfo- 
€ver. 

3.  And  why  might  not  Abraham  be  inftanced  in  >  Your  proof 
is  none.  i.  Isit  not  a  good  Argument  7>(ega'ive  y  (Abraham 
wasnot  juftified  by  works,  therefore  we  are  not  ?  And  a  good 
Argument  to  prove  the  Antecedent :  Becaufe  he  had  no  works 
ihatcould  juftifie  :  No  nor  thofe  which  were  thentruftedon 
tojuftification  2.  Doth  not  T^«/fhew  thathc  fpeakofthefe, 
when  he  proves  bis  aflertion,  1.  Becaufe  Abraham  was  then  in 
uncircumctfion ,  Rotu.  4. 10.  (what's  that  to  Gofpel  obedi- 
ence? ;  2.  Becaufe  the  Law  was  long  after  the  promife,  and 
was  nor  then  given,  gal.^.zj,  5.  T/iW  maketh  it  all  one  to 
be  juftHedbv  works,  and  to  be  juftified  by  the  Law  ;  as  abun- 
dance of  pdflages  fljew.  A  mukitude  of  particular   Texts  do 

es  pre  fly 


o°o 


expreQy  fhcwthatitlsaCcganuftification  only  thathefpeaks 
of,  and  that  he  dire(ftly  intcndeth  only  ^cgal  works.  I  will  now 
inllancebutinone,  viz.  Rom.  ^.  1 3.  compared  with C/fw.  22- 1 8. 
[^  For  the  promife  th/tt  h/boutd  bt  hs:r  of  the  world  ,  woi  not  to 
Abraham  and  his  feed  bj  the  Z^.-iw,  but  through  the  right  eotifnefs  of 
faith.  "J  Now  compare  with  this,  the  words  of  the  .promife  it 
felf,  L  cyfud  in  thy  feed  (hull  all  the  Nations  of  the  earth  be  blef- 
fed^  bee Atffe  thou  ht»fi  obeyed  my  voice. '2  So  ver.  16,  17.  Be- 
CAufe  thoH  h4f}  done  this  thin£,  &c-  ] 

4.  Its  not  cafie  to  conceive  how  any  man  canexpeft  aLegal 
or  Pharifaica!  luftificafion  by  Evangelical  works  without  a  grofs 
contradidion  :  For  example  •  to  be  juftified  Legally  by  Evan- 
gelical faith,  defire,  love,  thanks,  joy,  felf-dcnyal,  confeflion  , 
(^£-.  are  all  palpable  contradidions  :  And  fuch  a  mans  faith 
rauft  be  thus  expreft  ;  /  expe^  to  merit  lujiification  legalljft  by 
believing  in  Chrijl  as  the  fole  Aferiter  of  my  iHJlifcationAnd 
fafvation,  or  by  de  firing  Chrtff^or  by  loving  Chrifi  04  the  fole  Afe- 
riter of  my  fa'.vation  :  Or  by  th.wkjng  him^  or  rejoy-cing  in  him  as 
the  Sole- merit  era f  my  fulvM  ion  .t\  Or  /  expeci  legally  to  merit 
luftificAtion,  by  denying  that  Icarfifserlt  if,  by  any  right edufnejt  of 
my  own  ^  or  by  conf effing  that  I  defer ve  damnation  by  my  fins ,  or 
by  praying  0^  fceklrg  far  fihation  by  free  gift,  as  raetited  only  by 
Chr'!{l.~\  All  thefe  arc  palpable  contradictions  •,  and  no  man  can 
hold  both  that  knowcth  what  he  doth.  ^ 

5.  Yet  I  will  fuppofe  that  though  no  man  can  fo  truft  to  his 
works  for  lef;a!fuftification,  that  are  apprehended  by  him  as 
Formdly  Evangelical ,  yet  perhaps  he  may  do  it  by  fome  works 
thit  are  .i/.^r^^r.'//;  Evangelical,  and'fancied  by  him  to  be  what 
they  are  nor.  And  fo  I  ftill  fay  ,  that  though  it  were  Legal 
works  ihac  P.^«/did  directly  difpure  againll  ,  yet  confequenti- 
allv  and  indirectly  he  difpureth  agiinft  works  commanded  only 
IntheGofpel,  if  men  will  do  them  to  Lcg^l  ends ,  and  fancy 
them  Co  b-*  of  the  value  legally  ro  juftific  them. 

6.  I  will  t'lerefore  fuppofe  fome  men  to  be  fo  unreafonabk, 
as  ro  expect  a  Legal  Juftification  ,  by  their  bjlicving  or  confef- 
ling  that Chri;Vonly can  Legally  juftifie  them,  and  not  them- 
fclvcs  J  and  fo  I  will  grant  you,  that  P^«/doth  f  confcquenti- 
aliy)  exclude  ,i//jiw^/,  even  Evangelical  works  from  Juttifica- 

P  tion  : 


(.0^) 


tion  :  Buc  though  he  exclude  all  works ^  yet  not  in  every  notion, 
rordothhe  txclude  /III  i>4irtji  oi  All  works  in  our  jufti/icaci- 
on.    All  wo»  ks  as  vaihable  ojfenr.ns  ,  he  excludes,  and  lo  as  me- 
ritorious, not  only  in  point  of  t  omn^utative  Junice,but  aifo 
in  point  of  Ltgal  woith  and  Icgaljufticc,  as  the  Pharifecsfup- 
pofcd  thetp  mcr:torious  :  All  works  he  excludes  fi  om  ali  proper 
Caufality.    But  he  doth  not  exclude  all  works  from  having  any 
Jnterdt  at  all  in  fubordination  to  Chrift.  Do  you  verily  believe 
that  Repentance  and  Faith  have  no  Intcreft  in  our  Pardon  ,  in 
fub-ordinationtoChriU  ?  If  you  fay,  No,not  a>}y,  you contiSi- 
did  Lod,  and  your  felf,  and  all  the  Chriftian  woild.    If  you 
fay,  Tea-i  httt  they  jttjiifie  not  qua  works;  you  fay  nothing  to 
the  coniroverfie  :  For  1  have  over  and  over  as  loud  as  you, 
profeffed  that  they  juftifie  notfermaliter  as  works,    ^f  you  fay 
they  have  any  Intereft:    i.  Tell  us  better  what  it  is.    2.  And 
then  you  confute  your  general  afTertion.    There's  no  Chriftian 
that  I  know  but  will  confefs  that  the  Gofpel  works  have  the  inte- 
reft of  Declaring/^»/ in  our  final  luftification.    And  few  will 
deny  that  Repentance  hath  the  intereft  of  a  necefTary  qualifica- 
tion ,  or  condition  to  our  firft  Juftification.    Now  would  you 
perfwade  us  that  ?4«/cxcludeth  this  kind  of  Intereft ,  or  oppo- 
feth  faith  to  it?If  not  againft  ihc /t^^»al  intereft  of  works,ihen  not 
againft  all  Intereft  ;  therefore  if  Pauls  general  exclusion  will 
conlift  J^ith  your  fi^nal  Intcreft,  then  I  (hall  maintain  that 
it  will  conhft  with  the  fore-explained  Conditional  intereft 

I  will  not  therefore  be  guilty  of  yc  ur  charge  of  limiting  the 
Holy  Ghoft.  If  he  fpake  of  all  works,  1  will  believe  he  means 
All'deorkj,  But  I.  If  he  over  and  over  near  an  hundred  times 
at  leaft,  explain  himfelf  as  fpcaking  of  the  Law,  I  will  not  (hut 
my  cars  againft  that  explication.  And  2. 1  will  grant  it  is  alfo 
all  EvangtUcal  tv  rk' ,  at  leaft  by  confequence  :  F'utlneed 
not  therefore  grant  that  bccsufe  he  excludeth  >^V^c?  ^^there- 
fore he  exdudeih  Allkjnd  of  ^nterefi  of  all  woiks  j  but  only 
that  fort  which  he  difpuceth  againft. 

Bcfides  all  this,  I  muft  diftinguilh  of  Jt//Jificaticn  ,  Lega/ 
and  €vAngelical->  refpedive  to  the  projnifes  and  threatnings  of 
the  Law  and  Cofpel,  which  do  differ.  No  works  at  all  did  ju- 
ftifie  ^^brahAtfi^  from  the  charge  of  the  Law,r^»<irf  afinner, 

as 


a«  being  the  Righteoufnefs  of  the  Law,  and  the  matter  of  that 
Juftificacion.  Nor  wiil  any  worKs  acallfojuftifie  us.  But  ic 
doth  not  follow,  that  therefore  no  works  will  juftific  aman 
from  the  falfe  accufation  of  being  an  Impenitent ,  Unbeliever  , 
and  (o  having  no  part  in  Chrift  ,  whofe  Righteoufnefs  rauft  flop 
the  mouth  of  the  I^aw  :  Or  that  no  works  are  the  matter  of 
the  righteoufnefs  required  in  this  Conftitution  ,  £  He  that  bf 
iitvetio  fljA'l  befaved :  Repent  thit  jour  fins  m*j  be  blotted  out.  ] 
Which  are  here  required  as  the  condition  of  our  freedom  from 
the  Law,  by  the  righteoufnefs  of  Chrift.  In  a  word,  Taul  be- 
llows a  large  difpute  to  prove  that  no  work^  of  ours  do  anfwec 
the  expe^ation  of  the  Law,  and  fo  cannot  juflifieustbem- 
felves  from  its  A  ccufation.  Its  an  ill  confcquencc,  that  therefore 
PWproveth  that  no  works  of  mans  do  anfwer  the  fpecial  con- 
ftitution or  condition  of  the  Gofpel  (  Kt^tnt  and  Believe  in 
C^ri^^  &c.  ]  and  fo  are  not  the  Condition  of  ourintereft  in 
that  peifed  righteoufnefs  of  Chrift,  which  is  t\\con\y  valuable 
caufe  of  our  forefaid  Juftification. 

Treat.  222.  tAgairt,  that  works  of  all  forts  are  excluded^  u 
p^aitt,  if  J  OH  confider  the  ObjeEl  of  Iuflificati$n  ,  who  it  is  that  it 
here  f Aid  to  be  iujlifitd ,  and  that  />,  the  ttKgodly.  By  the  ungodly 
is  one  meant  that  hath  not  afufficient  and  adequate  holinefs'.fothat 
Abraham  though  re  generated,  jet  at  to  lujiification  «  ungodlj^  he 
cannot  jiand  before  God,  or  endure  ,  if  all  his  intferfeSlions  be  e»- 
^uired  after.  Ne^  certainlj  he  thatfulfilleth  the  conditions  oflufli- 
(ication,  cannot  be  called  ungodlj  j  for  he  doth  all  that  is  required. 

iy4»f^.  I .  Again ,  I  grant  all  works  excluded  ;  but  not 
in  all  their  relations ;  nor  are  all  their  Interefts  injuftificatioa 
excluded.  2.  This  Argument  I  fhould  not  have  expeAed  from 
you.  You  confcfs  that  by  ungodlj^  is  meant  fuch,  though  Rege- 
nerate and  holy,that  have  not  an  adequate  holinefs :  Adequate ; 
To  what  ?  to  the  Law  ?  or  to  the  conftitution  of  the  condition 
in  the  Gofpel  ?  Marvel  not  if  I  deny  the  Confequencc  of  your 
Argument,  and  if  1  be  unable  to  digeft  your  reafon  for  it. 
You  fay  ,  [  Hethitfulfilleththe  Condition  of  lufliflcation  ,  can- 
not be  called  ur.goJilj.']  ^\jiivi\\2Li  Condition  ?  I  confefs  he  that 

P  2  ful- 


(loS) 

fulrilleth  the  La^i  condition  cannot  be  called  unfndh^  nor  be 
unJuftifiablcbyibatLaw.  ^Bu:hc  that  pcrformetli  il;c  CofptI' 
Condition  of  liberation,  may  be  called  tingodl)  m  the  fenfe  ^ou 
now  mentionedjihat  iSjUr.juftiaablc  immediatly  for  his  works  by 
the  taw  :  or  one  tha  t  hath  not  an  holinefs  adequate  to  the  Law. 
Though  indeed  he  cannot  be  called  EvAngflicAllj   urgodl}'.  I 
fuppoie  you  clearly  fee  that  your  Argument  makes  as  much 
agauift  any  Condition  of  Juftihcation  in  us,  as  aga  nit  works 
being  the  condition.    For  againft  faith  it  felf,  being  any  Condi- 
tion,you  may  equally  argue  ,  [  Its  the  ungodly  that  are  jujlified: 
But  b(  tPat  fpilfitleth  the  coKditicni  of  ^tifiificatioM  ^  is  r»t  to  bi 
^4iUdt4»godly.  Hrgo,  &c.'\  But  if  you  take  ungofU'mefs  (  as  you 
do)  for  unadequate  holinefs  (to  the  Lawj  I  deny  your  Mi- 
nor-   Can  no  man  but  the  Perfedly  obedient,  perform  the  con- 
dition of  pardon  in  the  Gofpd  > 

Treat,  ib.  Sb  that  this  is  very  co*)fidernhle^that  alhhof§  ^h^m 
Godjujitfietby  hej^/iifieth  them  mtfor  any  thing  they  have  ofihfir 
oWw,  cr  finy  conditions  they  have  performed ;  i;fit  ns  fttch  tvho  are 
fii$»»rt  itkafiriH  examination^  anil  fo  deferve  condemnation  ,  and 
therefore  no  ^orkji  •/  grace  art  looked  uf  on. 

t/inf^.  I  have  anfwered  this  fully  in  Colvinns.  i.  Though 
Proteftantsoftfay,  that  Cod  favef.h  men /or  their  obedience, 
and  Scripture  ufe  the  term  [  btcaufe  ]  oft ,  yet  I  am  willing  to 
yield  to  yon  that  men  be  not  favcd  nor  juftified  for  any  thing  of 
their  own,  or/<?r  any  conditions  :  But  yet  he  would  net  jff/iu 
fie  them  without  the  performance  of  fome  conditions  j  buc 
would  condemn  them  for  the  non-performance  ,  even  with  a 
fpecial  condemnation,  diftindfrom  that  which  is  for  their  fins 
againft  the  Law. 

2.  Colvinus  was  the  firft  man ,  and  you  are  the  ferord  thac 
ever  I  read  (^  to  my  remembrance^  faying  thac  God  juftificth 
men  as finntrs.  A  (^Htu'entis  Ad  tmne  valet  esfift^uentia  if  ftsjin- 
ners^  then  allyj««frj  are  juftfhed.  If  not  as  performers  of  any 
Condition,  then  not  as  Believers  I  Thefe  things  want 
proof. 

Treat, 


1 


Treat,  ib,  L(!jlh\  th^.t  all  rvorhs are  exclude J^  i6  evident  hj  the 
JpoJllrsalle^Afott  out  cf  David,  who  wak^ej  matis yitjfedKe/sto 
he  in  thi),  that  God  imfuteth  righteeufnefs  without  V^crkj. 

Anf-w.  1.  This  is  fufficiently  anfwercd  in  the  former.  2.  VauI 
hence  immediattly  concludeth  that  Righreoufnefs  coines  not 
only  on  the  Circumcifion  :  whence  you  may  fee  what  works  be 
means.    3.  Your  (elves  expound  che  forcgoinj^  term  ur.godlj  ^ 
of  men  that  have  n(  t  ad(<jt<ate  holincfs,  t)iough  fincere  ^  there- 
fore ycu  mull  fotake  this  equipollent  terhi  \_vrithcut  vo^j  \ 
for  [without  thAt  adec]ttittehoiineJj~^'.  but  it  tbilows  not,  that 
therefore  its  without  any  humane  aft.  4.Yetfti!l  I  grant  this  al^ 
fo  ,  that  its  without  any  humane  ai>  ,  confidered  as  the  matter 
of  a  Legal  righteoufnefs^or  as  cppofire  toChrift  ,  or  co-ordi- 
nate with  him  :  but  not  without  any  humane  ad,  as  fubordinate 
toChrift,  and  asthematrer  of  that  Evangelical  righceoufnefs 
which  is  required  in  this  Corft.tution  [^Repent  and  BtVive  the 
Go/pel]  viz.  fincerely. 

Treat,  pag.  223.  fiAndivdeed  it  uat/aflconfefed^  th^t  its 
faith  only  th<*t  makes  the  contrMCl  between  God  and  the  foul  ;  that 
good  rvorkj  *re  not  reauired  to  this  initial  confenting^  unto  Chrifl  , 
fo  04  to  maks  him  ours,  hut  in  the  progrefs.  Thii  it  th-^t  in  fjfeSl , 
^hich  the  Pap  Jis  a ff.rm  in  other  fiords ^  Th^it  the  fi^-fi  fujhficati- 
en  M  orJj  hy  faith,  hut  thefecond  by  good  works, 

An[\\\  How  would  you  have  your  Tveaddr  urideiftand  thefe 
two  itfinuations?-  i.  Have  1  fo  oft  afferced  that  which  you  call 
myConfeffion,  and  put  it  into  an  ^ndex  of  diflindions,  left  ic 
fhould  be  over-lookr,  and  told  you  as  much  fo  long  ago  in  pri- 
vate writings,  and  do  you  now  come  out  with  an  \  Itsatlaji 
co>-ft'f^'ed  ]  J  hope  you  would  not  intimate  thyt  ever  I  denyed 
it  :  or  that  ever  I  wrote  Book  of  chat  fubjcd,  wherein  I  did 
notexprcfly  averr  it.  But  then  ( that  you  think  not  better  of 
me  then  1  deferve )  I  muft  fell  you,  that  when  I  ftill  excluded 
works  from  our  be^un  Juftification  ic  was  external  Obedience  , 
and  not  Repentance,  nor  thofeadsof  faith  (even  theKecei- 

P  3  vine 


(no) 


ich  tSftfe 


ving Chrift  as  Lord  and  Teacher  j  which  tnOTcthatoppofeme 
call  works. 

a.  If  you  take  it  but  for  an  argument  to  convince  fucb  as  I, 
that  [^the  Papi/hhoUit :  Ergo,  e^^-.]   I  mult  complain  that  it 
isuneffedual  .-  But  if  you  intend  it  for  another  effed  on  other 
perfons ,  viz,,  to  affright  them  with  the  found  of  fo  horrid  a 
name,  or  drive  them  away  by  the  ftink  of  it,  then  you  may  pof- 
fibly  attain  your  ends.   But  you  fhould  have  attempted  it  only 
by  truth.  Is  it  true,  that  Q  tkh  is  that  in  efe^,  ^hich  the  Papijis 
affirm  in  other  vpords  ?  J    Yea  is  it  not  a  notorious  truth  ,  that 
itu^tiite  another  thing  which  the  Papi/h  affirm  in  fomen^hut  /ik« 
words  ?  I.  The  world  knows  that  the  Papifts  by  the  firft  Juftifi- 
cation,  mean  the  firft  infufion  of  renewing  fpccial  grace.  2.  And 
that  by  the  fecond  Juftification,  they  mean,  the  adding  of  fur. 
ther  degrees  of  Sandification.  or  aduating  that  which  before 
was  given.    3.  That  they  hold,  faith  juftifieth  in  the  firft  Jufti- 
fication coHJiitutive.     4.  And  that  works  or  holinefs  juftifie 
ff««l/?tV«t»fMn  the  fecond  Juftification  ,  even  zi  Albedo  facit  al* 
bum^  veldoElrina  inditafacit  doElum.    On  the  other  fide,  I  have 
told  you  often  privately  and  publikely,  that,  i.  B^r  Juftificati- 
on I  mean  not  Sandification,  nor  any  Phyfical,  but  a  Relative 
change.    2.  That  by  firft  and  fecond,  I  mean  not  two  ftates,  or 
works,  but  the  fame  ftate  and  works  as  begun,  and  as  continued. 
3 .  That  faith  juftificth  neither  con^itutive  ^  mharenter,  nor  as 
any  caufc,  but  as  a  Receiving  Condition.     4.  And  that  works 
of  external  obedience  are  but  a  difpoHtive  condition,  and  an 
exciufion  of  that  ingratitude  that  would  condemn.  And  now 
judge  on  fecond  thoughts,  whether  you  here  fpeak  the  words  of 
Truth  or  Equity. 

Treat,  ib.  Aiainft  this gentral  exclnftonof  all'^srksi  isoppo- 
fid  ver.  4.  where  the  Apoftle  faiths  To  him  that  workeih  the 
Reward  is  of  debt ;  from  whence  they  gather  that  V^orkj  onlj 
which  4re  debts ^  are  excluded. 

jfnfw,  I  never  ufed  or  heard  fuch  a  coilcdion.  All  good  works 
ire  debts  to  God  ;  but  our  colledion  is ,  that  works  which  are 
fuppofed  by  men  to  make  the  reward  of  Debt,and  not  of  Grace, 
are  excluded.  Treat, 


(no) 


Tieat.  'But  if  tht'^he  ferloujlj  thought  ort,  it  makfs  flrongly 
avamji  them  ;  for  the  ApofiUs  Argument  it  a  Gencre  :  */  it  he 
hjVi'orkjy  its  of  Debt  :  therefore  there  are  not  works  of  Debt ^and 
Works  of  Ko  Debt. 

^nfvf.  I.  If  the  Apoftle argue <3  Qenere  ^  then  he  arguech 
not  from  an  Equivocal  cerm  ;  and  therefore  of  no  works  but 
what  fall  under  his  (jr«w.  2.  And  the  Apoftles  Gentu  cannot 
be  any  thing  mcerly  Phyfical,  becaufe  his  fubjed  and  difcourfe 
is  moral  :  and  therefore  it  is  not  every  ad  that  he  exdudeth. 
3.  Nor  can  it  be  every  Moral  Ad  that  IS  his  Genns  :  but  only 
ffor/^;  in  the  notion  that  he  ufeth  the  word  j  thatis,  All  fuch 
Works  as  Workmen  do  for  hire,  who  exped  to  receive  wages 
for  the  worth  or  defert  of  their  works, 

I  ihall  therefore  here  confute  your  aflcrtion  ,  and  (liall  prove 
that  All  workj  do  not  make  the  Reward  to  be  of  'Dtbt ,  tind  not  of 
Grace  :  and  confequently  that  Paul  meancth  not  either  every 
Ad,  or  every  Moral  Ad,  here  ^  but  only  works  fuppofed  Re- 
wardable  for  their  valu«  I  (  What  you  mean  by  d'ork;  of  Debt, 
and  fVorkj  net  of  Debt^  I  know  not  .-  they  are  not  Scripture 
words,  nor  my  words  ^  Forftilllfay,  All  Good  works  are  of 
Debt  to  God  from  man.  ) 

Argume.t  I.  Sxn^turaret  •,  There  are  many  Moral  Ads 
that  make  not  the  Reward /r<?w  «<■«  to  be  of  Debt,  and  not  of 
Grace  :  Much  lefs  will  fuch  Works  make  the  Reward  from 
God  to  be  of  Debt,  and  not  of  Grace.  The  Confequence  is 
grounded  on  thefc  two  or  three  Reafons.  i.  God  is  infinitely 
above  us  ;  and  therefore  lefs  capable  of  being  obliged  by  our 
worksthenman,  5.  God  is  our  abfolure  Proprietary  ,  and  wc 
arc  wholly  his;  and  therefore  we  can  give  him  nothing  but  hi« 
0A?n.  V  God  is  our  Supreme  Redor  ,  and  we  are  bound  to  a 
perjed  fulfilling  of  his  Law  .-  and  we  are  finncrs  that  have 
broak  that  Law,  and  deferve  eternal  death  .-  therefore  we  are 
lefs  capable  of  obliging  him  by  our  works  as  our  Debtor,  then 
of  obliging  men  (and  indeed  uncapable. )  4.  Gods  RewaixS 
i?  Eternal  o lory,  andminsis  but  fometranficory  thing  .-there- 
fore we  arc  lefs  capable  of  making  God  our  Debtor  for  Jurtifi- 

caiioa 


cation  and  Salvation  ,  then  rain  for  a  tnfle.    This  proves  the 
Conf^rquence. 

Now  rhc  Antecedent  I  prove  by  ^nftancc*.    i.  If  a  man  be 
ready  to  drown  in  the  water ,  and  you  oiTcr  to  help  him  out,if 
he  will  lay  hold  of  your  hand  :  this  act  of  his  is  ATcus  huwantu 
veiworalis^  and  yet  makes  not  the  deliverance  to  be  of  Debt., 
and  not  of  Grace,    2.  If  a  man  be  in  prifon  for  Debc  and  you 
ranfom  him  ,  and  offer  him  deliverance  on  condition  he  will  but 
confentro  coraeforch  on  the  account  of  your  Ranfom  :  this 
raoral  Adion  makes  not  his  Deliverance  to  be  of  Debt,  and 
no:  of  Grace.   3.  If  a  man  be  condemned  for  Treafon,  and  up- 
on Ranfom  made,  you  procure  and  offer  him  a  pardon,  on  con- 
dition he  will  rake  it ;  or  if  you  fay  ,  //  you  will  give  me  thankt 
for  it,  or  tak^  it  thuKYully  ;  or  ,  //  alfo  joH  confefs  jonr  Trea- 
fon ;  or ,  //  alfo  jott  crave  pardon  of  the   Prince  ;   or,  If  alfo 
yo»  confefs  me  jottr  benefaBor  -y  or.  If  alfo  j  oh  "^ill  p^ofefsyoar 
pt*rpofe totakeuprehellious  armt  no  more  \  or,  If  alfo  jou  rvill 
openly  profefs  the 'Trinces  Soveraignty  ,  and  renounce  the  Leaders 
of  the  Rebeljlsj  whom  you  have  followed  •   Vfon  any  one  ^  or  en  all 
thefe  condition  J ,  you  fhall  h.ive  a  free  and  full  par  d'^n ;  mthout 
any  cofi  or  faffering  of  your  o'^n.    Do  you  think  that  anyof 
thefe  do  make  the  pardon  to  be  of  Debt,  and  not  of  Grace  ? 

4.  If  you  give  a  man  a  Lordfhip  on  condition  he  take  it  as  a 
free  Gifc  from  you,  and  pay  you  yearly  a  grain  of  fand  ,  or  do 
fomeaft  of  homage  fas  to  fay  I  thank  you)  which  hachinit 
no  confideration  of  value,  but  only  of  acknowledgement  of 
dcpendance,  doth  this  make  your  Gifc  to  be  not  of  Grace? 

5.  If  you  give  a  beggir  a  piece  of  gold  ,  on  condition  he  will 
take  it,  and  put  off  his  hat,  and  fay,  1  thank  you.  I  will  not  be- 
lieve, that  any  of  thefe  Ads  do  make  the  Reward  to  be  not  of 
Grace.  But  if  you  bid  them  ,  Cfo  aid  do  mefo  mtny  d.ties  work, 
for  it  f  importing  fomewhat  profitable  or  valuable  for  your 
felf,  then  the  caie  ii  alcercd. 

Ar-gument  2.  Thofe  works  which  a  man  cannot  be  juftified 
without,  make  not^he  Reward  to  be  of  debt  and  not  of  Grace  : 
But  there  are  fome  works  that  a  man  canno:  be  juftificd  without^ 
Jam,  2.  24.  AlAtthew  12.37.  what  ever  they  be,  fomethey 
are. 

Argument 


Argument  3.  Tbofe  works  which  a  man  cannot  be  favcd 
without,make  not  the  Reward  to  be  of  Debt  and  not  of  Grace. 
But  there  arc  feme  works  that  we  cannot  be  favcd  without. 
Therefore  there  arc  feme  woikstha:makc  not  the  Reward  of 
Debt  and  not  of  Orace. 

The  Major  is  proved  by  the  exprefsexdufion  of  works  in 
this  fcnfe,  from  falvation  :  both  as  begun,  and  as  confummate, 
2  Tim.  1 .  9.  )^>ho  hathfuved  «j,  And  called  m  With  an  hoi}  ca!li>«gt 
not  according  to  our  yvorkj^  hut  hu  orvn  fnrpofe  and  gr^ce^  &C. 
Ephcf.  2.  8,9.  For  hy  Grace  ys  are  faved,  through  faith,  and  not 
cf  joftr  [elves,  it  is  the  gift  of  (jod  :  not  of  rvorl^t ,  left  anj  mm 
Jhottld  hafi^  Tit.  3  5i6,7.  Not  hy  >9fforks  of  Kjghteoufntfs 
^hich  rve  have  done^  but  according  to  hi4  '^Urcy  he ftived  m  hy 
the  rvaj?ji'.g  of  Regener.xt'orj  aid  the  renetvingof  the  HI)  Cjh»fi^ 

that  bemgj'jtifitd  by  his  Grace,  we  fhould  be  made 

Heirs  according  to  the  hope  of  eternal  life,  Rom  ,6.  23.  For  the 
\oages  of  fin  u  death,  but  theCift  of  Cj$d  is  eifr»'il  life  through 
Jeftu  C'..rij}  our  Lord,  \  A6i.4. 1  z. Neither  is  there  fulv<'tion  tn  any 
otbe-',  Mar.  25.3-!.  Come  je  blefftd  of  my  F cither ^  inherit  the 
Ki"gdom  prepared  for  yoft^  &c.  ]  whence  Expofitors  conclude 
againft  works. 

The  Minor  may  be  proved  by  an  hundred  texts,  Ol-fat.  25.' 
35.  For  I  WM  hungry,  dct.  Rev.zz.  I2.  and  2.  13.  '1/arl^  15. 
54.  Rev.20.ii'  Jam. 2  14.  I  Tet.i.lJ.  H  e  Will  ju^ge  every 
MAn  according  to  his  Workj,  &C. 

Argument  4.  Thofe  works  which  Grace  commandeth,  and 
caufeth  the  Godly  to  perform,  do  not  make  the  Reward  to  be 
not  of  Grace,  but  of  debt.  But  there  are  fome  fuch  woi  ks.£r^<?, 
&c. 

The  Major  is  evident:  What  Saint  dare  fay,  that  be  hatha 
work  that  makes  not  the  Reward  of  Grace,  efpecially  when 
it  is  a  woik  of  Grace? 

The  Minor  is  as  true  as  Scripture  is  true,  20^.9.8.  Col.  i. 
^io.^Thef[.2.\J  iTint.z.Z] .Tit.-^.i.  Heb.  13.21.  Mat.$.j6. 
H<-^.  10.  24.  iPet.2.i'~.  T»r.2.i4.and  i. S,  1^.  Ephef. ^.10, 

Sec.    Dare  any  fay  that  God  hath  not  commanded  good 

works?  or  yet,  that  he  hath  commanded  us  in  the  Golpcl,fo  to 

Q^  work 


C^H) 


work  that  the  Reward  may  not  be  of  grace ,  butdebt  ?  Will  any 
/ay  rhac  the  Saints  do  no  good  works?  orelfethn  they  dofuch 
good  works  as  make  the  Reward  to  be  not  of  Grace  but  of  debt, 
i  hope  not. 

yirgumetjt  ^  Repentance  is  a  moral  Aft :  Repentance  mak- 
eth  noc  the  Reward  to  be  of  debt,  and  not  of  grace  .•  therefore 
there  arc  fome  works  that  make  not  the  Reward  to  be  not  of 
grace,  bat  of  Debt.  The  fame  I  fay  of  Faith  it  felf,  andothec 
Ads. 

But  perhaps  fome  one  elfe  will  objed,  that  though  its  true 
that  there  be  fuch  works  ,  yet  they  have  no  Intcrcft  in 
thebufinefsof  our  Juflification,  and  therefore  ?rtH/doth  hence 
exclude  them.  AnfWer,  firft,  It  fufficed  tomy  laft  putpofe 
:o  prove  that  there  are  works  which  will  not  bear  his  defcription, 
and  therefore  are  not  they  that  he  means.  S^'condly ,  But  that 
thofe  other  works  have  fome  Intereft  in  thebufincfs  of  our 
Juftification ,  I  have  proved  in  the  beginning.  Repentance 
hath  the  promife  of  Pardon  .-  fo  hath  faith,  &c.  But  Tie 
not  unfeafonably  here  digrefs  to  this,  but  refer  you  to  what 
is  faid  before  and  after,and  ejfewherc  more  at  large. 

Argti.6.  In  vcr.'>,  the  oppofite  term  []  he  thatworketh  not  ] 
doth  not  fign  fie  him  that  performeth  no  moral  ad.  Therefore 
in  the  fourth  vcrfeX  he  that  worketh]  doth  not  fignific  him  that 
doth  perform  any  moral  ad.  The  confequence  is  undeniable 
from  the  evident  immediate  oppofition,betwcen  him  that  work- 
eth, and  him  that  worketh  not.  The  Antecedent  I  prove , 
Firft,  From  the  words  of  the  Text,  which  mention  one  ad, 
even  believing,  as  oppofite  to  working,  and  iraplyed  in,  or 
confident  with  not  working.  [  To  him  that  worketh  not,  but 
l>elieveth.  ]]  Secondly,  Bccaufeelfe  it  would  fu b vert  the  Gof- 
pel.  What  fenfe  would  you  make  of  \t  if  you  (hould  inter- 
pret this  and  fuch  texts  as  this  of  all  moral  Ads?  Such  as 
Chriftian  ears  would  abhor.  Jf  [  working  ]  be  the  Genus, 
atrd  the  TcKt  will  huld  as  extended  to  Belicving,Repenting,  &c. 
as  the  fps'iss,  and  that  even  in  their  due  Evangelical  notion:  Lee 
as  try  them  a  little  in  fuch  an  Expofition.  'V£r,/\^^.\  to  him 
ihat  workeeh,  that  is,  Rcpcntech,  Believeth,  &c,  the  Reward  is 
^QCaf :Grace>byc  of Debc,  Buc  co  bim  chac  WQrkab  ncE^  ( chat 
" '  "      '  ts. 


C"J) 


is,  that  Repenteth  not,  Lovcch  not  God,  Defireth  not  Chrlft 
or  Grace,  believeth  notinChnft,  )  bat  believeth  in  him  that 
juftifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  (  fuppofing  he  have  it  not  )  is 
imputed  to  him  for  righteoufnefs.  Jlsthis  a  ivvcccand  ChriPian 
fenle  ?  If  we  (hould  ran  oveV  an  hundred  fuch  Texts  by  fuch  an 
Intcrprctation,vou  would  hear  no  fweeicr  Melody. 

Let  us  hear  fome  modern  Expofitors ,  f  for  I  will  give  you 
no  thanks  to  grant  me  the  Anc'enrs,  \vithou':  citing  thc'Ti  ) 

I.  Calvin^  (  that  excellent  Expofitor  ^  faith  thus  [| (?/»'- 
rant  em  vocAt  ^m  fi4'i  merit  ti  alxjui '  fyomereiur  :  non  opciyHcfttt 
cut  nihil  dthetttr  opernm  merit 0.  Ne<juetnim  f.dshi  vult  el[eig' 
nxvos -^  fnh  t^nttim  ^<fercetja^iof  ejfs  vet  at  ^  tfui  a  Dro  ij'ik^UAW 
repofca'.t  ,  f Mrf/t  ;«'<•  IDei^itam.  ^  is  not  this  one  of  the 
Opinionifts;  that  to  far  joyneth  with  the  SociMia»sa.nd  Pa- 
pjls  ? 

2.  'Bi^llin^er  (  and  'PltArlorate  citing  him  )  makes  the 
Apoftle  to  argue  thus  [  SI  tjuU  fit  cjni  promere.itur  ali^uH 
o'^ere Cuo^  ret  promeritj^non  imputtiur  t'i  gratis ;  fed  mdihita 
redc-itftr  :  Fides  rep'4tattir  in  JHJiitiam  ,  non  qttod  aI  (juoi  tale 
prcMereawftrj  fed  <]mti  Domini  bon  tattm  apprtbendiiMUS.  Ergo^ 

5.  Bezn  :  Att^tii  el  tjui  opcratur  ^  tu  j  IfytH^c^  a  ' 
Id  eft,  ei  ^tsi  ex  of  ere  fit  alitfuid  promeritus.  Cui  opponitttr , 
0  f4«  ifya^ofjSpcs^  ^ui  non  cperntiir,  id  efi,  ^tti  opm  ntiHum 
ndfert     cujus   mercedem  fi.igitet  ,    fed  gratuita   Dei  promif* 

fione  nitittir Jufiificatio  emtn gratia  eft  in  Chrifio^  ifiavero 

Me  iii  eft  in  nobU. 

4.  Pifcator  in  Schol.  Sic  argfimentattir  Vmlus  :  Ei  qui 
cperibfts  meretur,  tuerces  non  imputatur.  vcr.  4.  ^f^«iAbra- 
hamo  jiffritiuffiit  imputatA ;  ver,  3.  Ergo  Abrabamus  jfiflhi^m 
non  eft  meritta  operjbus. 

5.  Ptter  Martyr  alfo  is  a  down  right  Opinionift^  In 
/of.  pag.  (»»/^/)i68.  Et  cumauitryjiuaVdi\i\o^  Operanti  & 
non  operanti^y.etjua^uant  fie  accipere  dshemtUt  qti^fi  i  'It  <jui  credunt 
non  6itriHtnr.  Nam  de  ilia  ta^itHnt  cperattone  lo<}u^tttr  ,  ^ua 
wereamur,  aut  merert  velimtis  Jujliti-im*  Et  hcc  loco  cor.firieratti 
dignum  eft  ^  (j»od  apni  TbeoUgos  fchala(iicoj  jam  inveter^vit 
Ht  dieant  meritttm  a.  Paulo  appellari  debitum :  ^Mare  ct^nt  hie 


CiiO 


Paulus  <«  JfiflifycAHorse  debit H&i  auferet,  ttecejfarie   (ti,im  to/lit  me^ 
ritutt^  ji  prrp-  e  a:  vere  Jt  illo  vd'umu  l.^tti. 

6.  Areti'js  >»  he.  Teriitim  Arq^HmeAtum ex  v' ril  ttlvorum^  ope 
rAjnf^ul  'nt  wercedem  ft4'>  j-*^e  ac  dehim  non  ex g^aihtfeJ  Abraha* 
mo  jttjlitu  delfit\  non/''*-! jurcfed  ex gratijeji  colLita:     E'go, 

^c.   "Ver.   5".    iV-^'W//  opera     '/tou  opm  f(i[(ftt imputaiiontt 

fed    ta^^'^dv  c<plt\ii,ua,   po^^ulajfet  \mer  to-wn  [uornm   debithm 
me>cederrf. 

7.  Anton.  ^Ajiti  m  loc.  iy^rq^urrtitttAtur  Ap'>(lolliit.  ex  lo^ 
cats  c^  condntii  inter  hominef  recepto  jufe  :  qni  eni*f*  locat 
cpfram  ju  m ,  pitfcifcitur  cutn  condttCl^re  -  ut  cor.grttens  oper£ 
p^etium  ipfi  xHwerftftr :  adeo  ut  non  obtmeat  mercedtm  gratis^ 

pd  ex  ope^£  cumipf.imercede     d:'^?0)<j,   — —    A''giimentum 

ergo  ef}  a  dtfp gratis  :  /tint  emm  difptrata  merces  dr  donum, 
ut  ^operant  &  non  operins.  Op. runs  acciptt  mereeiem  de- 
bit.im  :  non  opera'Jt  acchit  donurn.  S/f  tnim  inter  T)eptm  (fr. 
homines    ^vAK^ytf    ilia    ^ua  tfi  inter  donantem  (^  donatariuw. 

"^ =—— »  ^uod  a^  nomen    ruercedis   fpe^At  ,   apparet   ilUm 

duplicetJf  effe  :  nempe  mercedent  debitam  ex  proper tione  opera 
etim  re,  per  propor^tonem  Cjeometricdm  :  ut  cum  operario  pro 
dinrna  opera  daiu^  cfHod  aijuumeft  ^ex  mutuo ^ipaUtu.  (  This 
he  thinks  is  here  meant  )  tJ^lta  merces  efl  non  debit a^  (edgratut 

ita  :  e[t<f'^  tnn<jnam  fruUui  vel  commodttm  q*iodd.\,m. (This 

he  thinks  not  here  meant. ) 

Optrar.tem  vocat  iUum  qui  legis  operibtM  Jtiftitiam  venatur  : 
non  quod  untjuam  ullus  ext.terit  ijtsi  fie  operatits  efl  ,  ut  merce- 
dem  ciebit  am  merit  opffit  po/lulare,  Jed  ex  hjpotheji  loquitur  ^  hoc 
Tfjodo ;  Jiq(4ti  operaretur  ut  dec  et  ,  mercedem  debitam  pojfet  exi- 
gere. 

8.  D.tv.  Tar^m  in  loc.  Explicit  quid  fit  fidem  impH" 
tari  pro  jujiitia  :  minime  videlicet  idem  quod  atlum  vel  opus 
fidei  fm  merito  rejrutari  projnfiti/t  {fie  entm  nihil confecifftt^)  fed 

cre'ienti  uftitiam  ex  gratia  imputari  nulla  merito  aut  debito '— 

Operantem  non  vocat  eum  qui  bona  opera facit^  fed  qui  bonis  operi- 
hus  confdit,  juftitiam  quarit^  feu  qui  operatur  debits  mercedU 
caufa.  Nam  &  credenttt  bene  operantur^  non  vera  ut  Mercenarii: 
necoperibus  fufiitiam^vitammererivolunt.  ^uienimfic  ope- 

ratftr  gxeluditHr  A  gratify  &c.     ;^ /><i,  inquit  rts  habtt 

inttr 


( ii7> 


inter  homlnei  :  «jti  la^rat  pro  mercede^  in  vi»ea,  mlfitU,  run, 
veldumi.  •»  mfrcefiper  ado  labore  ttonlmfHtatur  vti  dfymtHr  ex 
era  i^,  jea  te-i  i  rex  Uhito  ut  meritufn  •,  id^ie  ex  online  jufli- 
ti£  ffvvM^-ny.Mi  qttt  funct  tCCjU'ilit  ittm  -iriihwetic^m  labori4  c^ 
fnercedu.     1  aIU  iniml.b  >-  e(i  -  r  hum,  yf'^s  indeh  turn,  merce- 

demtx  mdciifi  fuciem  debii'nn  pnpter  jnftitiAW. Abrahae 

ioitur  prow'lja  &  impiitMiujt*it  jufiitia  merces^  nitUo  operum  me- 
rit o,  fed  mtra  gratia.   ■ *  .-^*    reronon  operatftr  ^   nempe 

pro   merceh  ,    b.   e,  <j'4i  non  cjn<erit   J^ift-  tiam   osernm  weri- 

tii. 

9.  Dr.lf'iSet  in  loc  Q^I2.  B)  h'm  that  rvorketh  is  under- 
flood,  him  that  "^orkith  with  nn  inteft  thereby  to  merit  or  to  Ife 
juflified  :  For  heth.it  bel  evetha/fo  wo'keth-,  but  he  is  faid^  not 
to  work^  fecundumquid  ,  btcuufe  he  doth  it  not  to  the  end  to  me- 
rit bi» 

10.  Duv.  \D;c^fo»  in  loc<-.  Ratio  3.  A^fercenario  cferayiti^ 
feu  fupitiitm  ex  ope-  ibus  cjtitrenti.  merces  non  fotef  ejfegratuit4y 
fed  ex  debitofeu  mtnto  retribuenda  e(l. 

11.  CMficrigiQt  cone.  Rhem.  in  loc.  for  if  the  Rervard 
Jhould  be  given  according  to  Workj  ,  God  /houli  be  a T)tbtor 
unto  man  :  'But  it  u  abfu^d  to  m\k«  ^<'-^  '^  Debtor  to  m^n. 
2.  He  fpsaksth  not  of  that  RexvA'-d  that  ignorant  men  cha/- 
lenretothemfelves\  but  of  the  Re->v.irdihAt  God  fjouUtn  ujlice 
give^  if  men  haJdefeerved.'t  by  their  works. 

12.  Hemi  gfus  (  even  a  Lutheran  )  fuppofeth  the  Argument 
to  be  thus.  Jmpi4taiia  gratuita  non  eji  operantis  merces  :  j«/?i- 
tia  cred(»tis  eft  imputatio  gratuita  :  ergo  jiifiiti*  credentis  non 
eji  operuntis  merces.  Afapr  prob.itur  per  contririum  ;  Mercet 
operant*^  id  eji^  li  qui  aliijuid operibus  promeretur^  dtftur  ex  de- 

bto. 'Prebatio  k<tc  per  cone  cjjtonem  RhetoricaminteUi' 

genda  e(l.     N(ej4>e}itMmenim^^B.w\\is  Jentit  ^  quod  (juifquAm  ex 

debit 0  fiat  j-^fiui  revera^  fed  (J4£  fit  nature  rerum  indtcat — 

Imputare  efi  alicjuid gratia  conferre ,  non  ex  debito  tnbuere. 

Merets  proprie  e/i  quod  debebatur  ex  merito  :  hoc  «■/?,  Debit ffo' 
lutio. 

Yea  in  his  blow  at  the  Majorifts  he  confefTcth  the  truth 
f  8.  Evertitur  eorum  dogma ^  qui  clamant^  opera  nece§ ana  ad 
faluttmy  qua  falus  cum  djufiificatione feparari  neqttit ,  non  ha* 

Q  3  hit 


CiiS) 


^et  alliU  caufoi  aut  nttrlta^  (j'tam  ip/a  fu^ific^tto^  Uoc  tanttn 
fattndumeji  quod  operA  mceffario  rtcjuirantm  infuJlrficatU,  ut 
iter  I'termtdium,  ion  ut  cn^-'ft  aut  merita. 

13.  Adtck  Rtig(rus  {  a  Lutheran  )  in  loc.  Impufarofniei  oppor.i- 
tnr  imptttationi  ex  nntrifo  -^  im^utitio  fiJeijit  fucundum  ^rutiam  : 
S.  fides  in  nrgotto  JufitficMiunn^  ntn  conftderatur  ut  orui  morale  : 
mnidemm  per  woaumfpiru  ittiktatur,  fecundtim  debitum  C^  tti^' 
rttone  iwpttatur  ■    -  [   Et  qui  operator  ^;  ^ve  operjtm 

renatus  Jit ^  five  non^  dummodo  ek  i'te?itioy!erperetifr,'t>tj<4efi)ie, 
ut  mtrcedtm  reportet  &  opera  [u a  ceijorio  '^Oii  judicio  oppofita 
vtUt. 

14.  In  like  manner  Georg  CJ'Xtuj  (  a  Lutheran  )  in  loc  pag. 
a6,28,&c. 

To  thefeT  might  add  many  other  ProteftantExpoficors,and 
the  votes  of  abundance  ot  Polemical  DiVines*  who  teilchcPa- 
pifts  that  in  P-iuls  fenfe  its  ail  one  [^  to  be  juftified  by 
works :  to  be  juftified  by  the  Law  :  and  to  be  juftifted  by  me- 
rits, i 

But  this  much  may  fuffice  for  the  vindication  of  that  Text, 
and  to  prove  chat  allworki  do  not  make  the  Reward  to  be  of 
Debt,  and  not  of  Grace,  but  only  mrritoHous  mercenary 
works,  and  not  thofe  of  gratitude,  eirc  beforenamed. 

Treat,  ibid.  \Thefeca»A  Argumeyt  maybe  from  the  pfculur 
Mnd  exprefs  difference  that  the  Scripture giveth between  fahkand 
•other  gracefi  in  rfpecl  of  fufiification.  So  that  faith  and  good 
Tvorki  are  not  to  he  confldered  as  concurrent  in  the  fame  manner  , 
thoHgh  one  primarily,  the  other  fecon<iarily  :  fo  that  if  faith  when 
its  fatd  to  faffife.  doth  it  not  at  a  cond  tion  ,  hut  in  fome  other 
peculiar  notion,  which  worf^  are  not  capable  of  then  we  are  not 
Jufitfied  by  ^orkj  as .  "^ell as  f^irh.  Now  its  not  lightly  to  bi  p^'f* 
fed  over  that  the  'Scripture  Jiill  ufeth  a  peculiar  exprej/ion  of  faitht 
\ipbich  is  incommuricable  to  other  graces.  Thm  Rom.  3. 25' 
Remiffion  of  fins  is  through  faith  in  hit  blood  ,  Rom.  4*  %* 
Faith  is  counted  f'^r  Righteoufnefsi  Rom.  5,1.  Galatjans2. 16; 

Anf^tr.  Fir^  This  is  nothing  to  the  Queftion,  and  defcrves 

no 


no  further  anfwer.  The  Qaeftionis  not  now  whether  faith  and 
works  juftifie  in  the  fame  manner  :  thats  but  a  confequcnt 
( righdy  explained  )  of  another  thing  in  queftion ;  your  felf 
hath  here  made  it  the  queftion,  whether  Works  be  Conditions 
of  Juftification  ?  And  that  wh'ch  1  affirmed  is  before  explained. 
I  grant,  that  if  faith  jaftifie  not  as  a  condition,  but  ^^cvvrwf  in 
any  other  refpcft, then  Faith  and  Repentance  j  (^r.  juliifie  not  in 
the  fame  manner  ;  fo  that  the  famenefs  of  their  Intercft  in  the 
general  notion  of  a  condition,  fuppofeth  faith  to  be  a  condition; 
but  if  you  can  prove  that  it  is  not,  llhall  grant  the  difference 
which  you  prove.  Now  it  is  notour  quefton  here,  v.hether 
faith  be  a  condition,  or  an  Inftrument-  but  whether  whev 
works  (  asyouchoofetocall  them)  or  humane  afts  be  condi- 
tion?. 

Secondly,  Scripture  taketh  not  faith  in  the  fame  fenfe  as  my 
Oppofers  do,  w  hen  it  gives  it  the  peculiar  expreffions  that  you 
mention.     Faith  in  P^nlf  fenfe,  is  a  Belief  in  jefus  Chnft  (  in 
all  the  refpeds  eflential  to  his  perfon  and  office  )  and  fo  a  hearty 
Acceptance  of  him  for  cur  Teacher,  Lord  and  Saviour  j  (  Sa- 
viour I  fay  both  from  the  guilt  and  power  of  Cm)  and  as  one 
that  will  lead  us  by  his  word  and  fpirit  into  Poffeffion  of  eternal 
(31ory  which  he  huh  purchifed.  ]     So  that  it  inciudeth  many 
afts  of  Affent,  and  a  Love  to  our  Saviour,  and  dclirc  of  him  j 
and  itimplyeihfclf-deniai,  and  renouncing  our  own  rlghteouf- 
ncfs.  and  all  other  Saviours,  and  a  fenfe  ot  our  fin  and  mifery, 
at  leaft,  as  Antecedents  or  concomitants ;  and  finccre  Affiance 
and  Obidience  in  gratitude  to  our  Redeemer,  as  necefTary 
confcquents :   And  this  faith  is  fet  by  P.«»/,  in  oppoficon  to  the 
bare  doing  of  the  works  of  A'fofei  Law  (  and  confequently  of 
any  other  works  with  the  fame  intention  )  as  feparated  from 
Chrift-whowas  the  end  and  life  of  it,  oratleaft,  co-ordinate 
with  him ;  and  fo  as  the  immediate  matter  of  a  legal  Righteouf- 
nefs;  and  conlcquently  as  mercenary.and  valuable  in  themfelves, 
or  meritorious  of  the  Reward-     This  is  Pau's  faich.  But  the 
faith  difputed  for  by  myOpp')nents,  is  the  Aft  of  recumbency 
or  Affiance  on  Chrift  at  Juftifier  or  Prieft,  which  they  call  the 
Apprt  henfion  of  Chrifts  righteoufnefs  j  andthisasoppofcd  to 
the  Acceptance  of  Chrift  as  our  Teacher  and  Kingj  our  Hus- 
band, 


(IZO) 


band,  Head,  g~^  (  further  then  chcle  contain  his  Priefthood  : ) 
and  oppofcd  to  Repentance,  to  the  love  of  our  S:iviour,  to  de- 
nying our  own  righrcoufncfs,  confciiidgour  fins,  and  confef- 
fing  Chrift  to  be  out  only  ^.aviour,  1  harikfulntTs  for  free  grace, 
C^c-  all  which  arc  called  p^orkj  by  chcfe  men,  and  excluded 
from  b.ingfo  much  as  Conditions  attending  faith  in  our  J  unifi- 
cation or  Reraiflion  of  fin. 

The  cafe  may  be  opened  by  this  fimilitude.     A  Phyfitian 
comcih  ro  a  populous  City  in  an  Epidemical  Plague  :  There  is 
none  can  fcape  without  his  help  :   he  is  a  flranger  to  them,  and 
they  have  received  falfe  mformations  and  apprehenfions  of  him 
that  he  is  but  a  mountebank  and  ceccivcr,  though  indeed  he  came 
of  purpofe  in  love  andcompaflion  to  fave  their  lives,  having  a 
moft  coftl,  receipt  which  will  certainly  cure  them.     He  offereth 
hunfelf  to  be  their  Phyfit-an,  and  freely  to  gtvc  them  hts  Anti- 
dote, and  to  cure  and  fave  them,  if  the\  willbuc  content,  that 
is,  if  they  will  take  him  for  their  Phyhtian,  and  thankfully  take 
his  noedicine;  Viis  enemies  difTwadcthe  people  from  believing  in 
him,  and  tell  them  that  he  is  a  Deceiver,  andthanf  they  will 
but  ftir  themfelvesjard  work,and  ufe  fuch  dyet  and  medicines  as 
they  tell  them  of,  they  (hall  do  better  without  him  •,  and  a  third 
party  that  feem  to  be  friends,tell  them,  though  y  ;u  do  take  him 
for  your  Phyfirian   yecmuftyou  work  your  ftlf  to  health, and 
take  thofe  other  medicines  as  well  as  his,  if  you  will  be  cured. 
But  the  Phyfitian  faith,  its  only  your  trufting  in  me  that  can  cure 
you.    Now  here  we  arc  at  a  lofs  in  the  interpreting  of  his  con- 
ditions-    Some  fay,  that  they  muft  be  cured  barely  by  believing 
or  trufting  in  him  i  and  not  by  taking  his  perfon  m  the  full  re- 
lation of  a  Phvfitian,  or  at  leaft,  not  by  taking  his  medicine, 
which  they  abhor,  nor  by  txrrcifing  or  fweating  upon  it,  or  ob- 
ferving  the  dyet  and  dindions  which  he  giveth  them.     BuC 
I  rather  interpret  him  thus  i  in  requirng  y<.u   to  take  him  for 
your  Phyfitian,  it  is  implyed,  thai  you  murt  take  his  medicines, 
how  bi:ter  foever^and  that  you  muft  order  your  felves  according 
to  his  diredions,  and  muft  not  take  cold,  nor  eat  or  drink  that 
which  he foibiddeth  ycu;  for  though  it  be  onl/  his  precious 
medicine  that  can  cure  you  yet  if'soa  will  take  thofe  things  that 
are  deftrudive  to  you,  it  may  hinder  the  working  of  it,  and  an  ill 
j  dyet 


Cui) 


dyet  or  difordered  life  may  kill  you.  The  working  therefore 
that  he  excluded,was  not  this  implyed  obfervancc  of  his  diredi  - 
ons,  but  your  owa  Receipts  and  Labourings ,  as  above- 
faid. 

3 .  I  further  anfwer  to  your  ohfcrvation ,  that  the  fame  Scri- 
pture that  faich  ,  [^  IVe are jufiifiedb)  fatth^  doth  alfo  fay,  thac 
Except  ye  Repent,  je  pjallallptrijh,  Luke  13.3,5.  And  Reptnt 
and  be  baptized  every  one  of  y  OH  in  the  name  of  lefm  Chrifl  for 
the  Rem'Jfton  of  ft 'IS  ^  Acti  2.  ^S.  and  mentioncth  the  Baptifm 
of  RcpsntAnceforthe  Remiffionof  ftn  — and  joyneth  the  preaching 
of  RepeKtance  and  Rem/Jion  ^  Luke  24.  47-  Rtpent  and  be  Con' 
'vtrttd,  that  your  (ins  may  be  blotted  out,  &C.  Luke  6  37.  For- 
give aidtt  Jhiill  be  forgiven  yoHyf  am.  5.  15.   The  prayer  of  faith 

jhallfAve  the  ftck and  if  he  hnve  committed  ftns  they /hall 

be  for  given  him.,  AfAt,6.  14,  15.  If  jou  forgive  men  thtir  tref- 
paffes.,  your  heavenly  Father  vcill  forgive  you ;  but  if  you  forgive 
not.  See.  A^ark^  II.  II,  25  •  Forgivcy  that  your  Father  may  for- 
give  you.  I  lohn  1.9.  If  ^e  confefs  our  ftns,  he  it  faithful  and 
]ufi  to  forgive  m  our  fins ,  &c-  Ifa.  55.  6,  7,  &c.  And  he  that 
faith,  Pf^e  are  Juflifi-d  by  fMth  ,  faith  alfo,  that  [  by  workj  a 
man  16  jffflt^ed^  and  not  by  faith  only  ',  ]  and  that  [by  ouryvordt 
nepjailbejtiflificd.  \ 

4.  Laflly ,  to  your  argument  from  the  peculiar  attributions 
to  faith,  I  fay,  that  we  do  accordingly  give  it  its  prerogative,  as 
far  a<!  thofe  attributions  do  dire>it  us,  and  would  do  HiOre  ,  if  ic 
were  not  for  fear  of  contradiding  the  Scripture. 

Treat,  pag.  2:4.  From  thefe  txpreffions  it  is  that  our  Onho- 
dox  Dizi'jcs  fay ^that  filth ytfiificth  as  it  is  an  Inflrumtnt,  Ufing 
hild  on  Chrift ^SiQ.  ad  pag.  226. 

c^«/rt\  Though  I  could  willingly  difpatch  withone  man  at 
once,  yet  becaufe  it  is  tlie  matter  more  then  the  perfon  ,  that 
muft  be  confidered,  1  muft  crave  your  Patience  as  to  the  'S.n- 
I'.vering  of  this  Paragraph,  till  I  come  to  the  Difpute  about 
faiths  Inftrumcntality,  to  which  it  doth  belong,  that  fo  I  may 
not  trouble  the  prefent  Difpuce  by  the  Interpofition  of  ano- 
ther. 

R  Treat. 


(.22) 


Treat,  pag.  226.  The  third  Argument  is.  If  in  the  continu- 
anct  anii  progrefs  of  cur  Jujiificatton  we  are  jufiified after  tiefamt 
manner  we  ^ere  dt  fi^ft  t  then  its  not  hj  faith  and^orl^/^  but 
hj  f^ith   onl)  04  diftincl  to   X^orl^  ^    Rom.     I,   IJ.    GalaC.  5. 

vAnfrv.  I .  I  grant  the  whole,  underftanding  faith  and  works 
as  Taul  do  h,  but  not  as  you  do. 

2.  By  \_the  [ame  manner  ~\  either  you  mean ,  \  the  fame  fpe- 
cifical/y  (  as  fpecified  from  the  Covenant  and  Objed  )  as  di- 
ftind  from  Jewifli  Righteoufnefs ,  or  from  all  falfe  waies,  or  all 
Mercenary  meritorious  works  (  fo  intended  )  ,  or  any  manner 
that  is  no:  fubordinate  to  Chrift,  and  implyed  in  Believing  ] 
And  thus  your  Antecedent  is  true ,  and  your  Confcquence  (  in 
your  fenfe  of  faith  and  works )  is  falfe  j  Or  clfe  you  mean  [  the 
fame  manner  2  in  oppofition  to  any  additional  ad  implyed  in 
our  firft  believing  as  its  neceffary  Confequent.  ]  And  thus 
your  Minor  or  Antecedent  is  falfe.  If  you  will  not  believe  me, 
believe  your  felf,  who  as  flatly  fpake  the  contrary  Doflrine,  as 
ever  I  did ,  being  not  as  it  feemsin  every  Ledure  of  the  fame 
thoughts  J  pag.  1 1 8.  you  write  it  for  obfervation  in  a  different 
Charader  ,  thus  [_  For  though  holy  rvorks  do  nttjujiifie  ,  yet  by 
them  a  man  14  continued  in  a  fi ate  of  Jufiification  :  fo  that  did 
not  the  Coven.int  of  grace  interpofe,  grofs  and  wicked  ^aies  would 
cut  tjf  our  fu/i  location ,  and  put  pu  in  a  flute  of  Condemnation.  J 
But  becaufe  you  may  avoid  your  own  authority  at  pleafu^e  many 
waies,  I  (hall  give  you  a  better  authority  that  cannot  be 
avoided. 

!.  In  our  firft  Juftification  ,  we  were  not  jujiifed  by  our 
words  :  but  in  our  laft  Juftification  at  Judgeraeni:  we  fhall, 
Ol'Ut.  iz.  36,37.  therefore  they  fo  far  differ  in  the  man- 
ner. 

2.  In  our  fifft  Juftification  we  were  not  juftified^;o«rft'<>r;('/-, 
but  afterwards  we  are,  in  fome  fenfe,  or  elfe  '^ames  fpoke  not  by 
the  Spirit  of  God,  ^nm.  2.  24.  The  Major  is  plain ,  in  that  the 
works  of  Abraham^  Rahab  and  fuch  like ,  that  lames  fpeaks  of, 
were  not  exiftent  atthcic  firft  Juftification. 

3.  In 


(1^3) 


3-  Incur  firftjuftification  we  are  not  Judged,  (  and  fo  Jo- 
ftified  )  occoriiyig  to  our  rvorkj.  But  in  the  laft  wc  are ;  therefore 
they  differ  in  the  manner. 

4.  In  our  firft  Juftification  we  arc  not  juflified  by  the  mouth 
of  thcludge,  in  prefence  parting  51  final  irre^^r^lblc  fentence 
on  us :  but  in  the  laft  wc  are  ;  therefore  they  differ  in  the 
manner. 

5.  Our  firft  pardon  is  not  given  us  on  condition  of  our  firft 
forgiving  others  :  but  the  continuance  is,  LMjtth.  18.  3$* 
€^6.14,15.  ^ 

6.  Our  firft  pardon  is  not  given  us  i[  ^e  cor.fifs  our  fms  : 
(  For  we  may  be  pardoned  without  that )  :  but  the  renewed  or 
continuei  pardon  is,  if  we  be  called  to  it  ,  i  John  1.9. 

7.  Reconciliation  and  final  Juftification  is  given  to  us  in  title, 
If  we  continne  in  the  faith  grounded  an<i  fettled,  AYJ^  be  not  moved 
HTvayfrom  the  hspe  ef  the  Gofpe/t  &c.  Cef.  1.23. 

8.  In  our  firft  Believing  we  take  Chrift  in  the  Relation  of  a 
Saviour,  and  Teacher,  and  Lord,  to  fave  us  from  all  fin  ,  and 
to  lead  us  to  glory.  This  therefore  importeth  that  we  accord- 
ingly fubmit  unto  him,  in  thofe  his  Relations,  as  a  neceffary 
means  to  the  obtaining  of  the  benefits  of  the  Relations.  Our 
firft  fairh  is  our  Contrad  with  Chrift,  or  Acceptance  of  him  as 
our  Saviour  :  And  all  contra ds  of  fuch  nature  ,  do  impofc  a 
neccffityof  performing  what  we  confent  to  and  promife ,  in 
order  to  the  benefits.  To  take  Chrift  for  my  Ssviour,  is  to  take 
him  ro  fave  me  ,  viz,,  from  the  power  and  guilt  of  fin  j  there- 
fore if  1  will  notbefavcd  by  him  when  I  have  done,  but  had 
rather  keep  my  fin,  then  I  did  but  nominally  and  hypocritically 
tPke  him  for  my  Saviour.  To  take  him  for  my  Teacher  and  be- 
comeiis  Difciple,  importeth  my  Learning  of  him,  as  neceflary 
to  ch^encHr. 

And  in  humane  contrafts  it  is  fo.  Barely  to  rake  a  Prince  for 
her  husband  miy  entitle  a  woman  to  his  honours  and  lands  : 
But  conjugal  fidelicy  is  alfo  neceffiry  for  the  continuance  of 
them-  for  -adultery  would  caufe  a  divorce.  Confent  and  lin- 
ing may  make  a  man  yourSouldier  :  but  obedieni^  and  feryice 
is  as  neceifdry  to  the  Continuance ,  and  the  Rew/rd.  Confent 
may  make  a  ;:^an  vour  fervant,  without  any  fcrv/e,ar.d  lo  give 

R  2  ^  hira 


(I  2. 4-) 


him  entertainment  in  your  family.  But  if  he  do  not  aAually 
ferveyou,  ihefe  fliallnot  be  conrinued  |  nor  the  wages  obtain-' 
ed.  Confent  may  enter  a  Scholar  into  your  School ;  but  if  he 
will  not  Learn  of  you,  he  (hall  not  be  continued  there.  For  all 
thefe  after- violations  crofs  the  ends  of  the  Relations.  Con- 
fent may  make  you  the  fubjeft  of  a  Prince,  but  obedience  is 
neceflary  t.0  the  continuance  of  your  Priviledges.  All  Cove- 
nants ufually  tye  men  to  fomewhat  which  is  to  be  performed  to 
the  full  attainment  of  their  ends.  The  Covenant-making  may 
admit  you,  but  its  the  Covenant-keeping that muft continue 
you  in  your  priviledges*  and  perfed  them.  Sec  more  in  my 
Confef  pag.47. 

3.  But  I  further  anfwcr  you,  that  according  to  the  fenfe  of 
your  party,of  the  terms  {_faithanclworkj']l  deny  your  confe- 
quence  :  For  with  them  [^  Faith']  is  [H^orks^  •  And  though 
in  Pauls  fenfe  we  are  not  at  all  juftified  by  works-;  and  in  lAmes 
bis  fenfe  we  are  not  at  firft  juftified  by  works ;  Yet  in  the  fenfe 
of  your  party,  we  are  juftificd  by  works  even  at  firft.  For  the 
Accepting  of  Chrift  for  our  King  and  Prophet,  is  ^orki  with 
them:  and  this  is  74»// faich>  by  whichheandatlare  juftified. 
Repentance  is  works  with  them  :  And  this  is  one  of  Gods 
Conditions  of  our  pardon.  The  Love  and  Defire  of  Chrift  our 
Saviour  is  works  with  them-.but  thisis  part  of  the  faith  that  Paul 
was  Juftified  by.  The  hkel  may  fay  of  many  ads  of  AfTenc , 
and  other  ads. 

Treat.  Led.  24.  p.  227.  Argu.  4.  Hethatijjafiifeii  hyful^ 
falling  a  Qon^'uion^  though  hi  he  thrtunto  enabled  hy  grace ^  jet  hi 
is  jufl  and  righteous  in  himfelf  '•   But  all  jtt/lified  ferfons  ,   oi  to  9 
lujiification  ,  are  not  right  eons  in  themfelves,  hut  in  Chrifi  their 
Surety  and  Mediator.  • 

y4»f^.  1.  If  this  were  true  in  your  unlimited  latitude.  Inhe- 
rent Righteoufncfs  were  the  certaincft  evidence  of  damnation. 
For  no  man  that  had  inherent  Righteoufnefs,/.  e.  Sanguification, 
could  be  juftified  or  faved.  £uc  I  am  loth  to  believe 
that. 

2.  This  Argument  doth  make  as  much  againft  them  that  take 

faith 


Om) 


Faith  to  be  the  Condition  of  Juftification,  and  fo  look  to  be  ju- 
ftified  by  it  as  a  Condition ,  as  againft  them  that  make  Repen- 
tance or  Obedience  the  Condition  :  And  it  concludeth  them  all 
excluders  of  the  true  and  only  Juflification.  J  am  lolh  to  dif- 
fent  from  you  :  but  I  am  loather  to  believe  that  all  thofc  arc 
unjuftified ,  that  take  faith  for  the  Condition  of  Juftificati- 
on.  They  are  hard  Condufions  that  your  Arguments  in- 
fer. 

3.  Righteoufncfs  in  a  mans  felf  is  either  ^^//W;^,  or  Re- 
lative^  called  imputed.  As  to  the  later ,  I  maintain  that  all  the 
juftified  are  Righteous  in  thcmfelves  by  an  Imputed  Relative 
Righteoufnefs^meritedfor  thembyChrill  ,  and  given  to  them. 
And  this  belief  I  will  live  and  die  in  by  the  grace  of  God. 
Qualitative  (  and  Active  )  Righteoufnefs  is  threefold,  i.  That 
which  anfwers  the  Law  of  works  ,  [  Obey  perfectly  and  live.  ] 
2.  That  which  anfwers  the  bare  letter  of  Mofes  Law,  (without 
Chrift  the  fenfcandend)  which  required  an  operous  task  of 
duty,  with  a  multitude  of  facrifices  for  pardon  of  failings, 
{  which  were  to  be  effectual  only  through  Chrift  tvhom  the  un- 
believing Jews  under ftood  not.  )  3 .  That  righteoufnefs  which 
anfwers  the  Gofpel  impofition  R/peut  and  Believe.  As  to  the 
firftofthcfe,  A  righteoufnefs  fully  anfwcring  the  Law  of 
nature,  lyield  your  Minor,  and  deny  your  Major.  A  man  may 
be  juftified  by  fulfilling  the  condition  of  the  Gofpel  which  giveth 
us  Chrift  to  be  our  Righteoufnefs  to  anfwer  the  Law,  and  yet 
not  have  any  fuch  righteoufnefs  quilitative  inhimfelf,  as  (hail 
anfwcr  that  Law.  Nay  it  ncceffarily  implyeth  that  he  hath  none: 
For  what  need  he  ro  perform  a  Condition,  for  obtaminq  fuch  a 
Righteoufnefs  by  free  gift  from  another,  if  he  had  it  in  himfelf. 
And  as  to  the  fecond  fort  of  Righteoufnefs,  I  fay,  that  it  is  but 
a  nominal  righteoufnefs ,  confilling  in  a  conformity  to  the  Let- 
ter without  the  fcnfe  and  end,  and  therefore  can  juftife  none  ; 
bcfides  that  none  fully  have  it.  So  that  the  A4ofiical  Righteouf- 
nefs, fo  far  as  is  neceft^ry  to  men,  is  to  be  had  in  Chrift,  and  not 
in  themfelves.  But  the  performance  by  themfelves  of  the  Go» 
fpel  Condition,  is  fo  far  from  hindringus  fiom  that  gift*  that 
without  it  none  can  have  it.  But  then  as  to  the  third  fort  of 
righteoufnefs  qnalitative,  I  anfwer  ,  He  that  pcrformcth  the 

R  I  Cofgeli 


(lid) 

Gofpel  Condition  of  Repenting  and  Believing  himfelf,  is  not 
therefore  Righteous  in  him(elf  with  thacrightecurncfs  qualita- 
tive which  anfwereth  the  Law  of  works.  But  he  that  perform- 
eth  the  fiid  Gofpel  Conditions,is  Righteous  in  himfelf.  i.  Qma- 
litativtly  and  afiively  ^  with  that  righteoufncfs  which  anfwers 
the  Golpel  Conftitution,  [_  He  thAthtiieveth  f^alUe/aved-tic':.] 
which  is  but  a  particular  Righceoufnefs,  by  a  Law  of  Grace, 
fubordinated  to  the  other  as  the  Condition  of  a  free  gifr. 
2.  And  Relatively,  by  the  Righteoufncfs  anfwering  the  Law  of 
Works,  as  freely  given  byChritton  that  Condition.  This  is 
evident,  obvious,  ncceflary,  irrefragable  truth  ,  and  will  be  fo 
after  all  oppofition. 

Treat,  pag.  228.  Tea  I  think,  if  it  he  velt  weighed,  it  will  bt 
found  to  heacontr/idi6iion  ^  to  fay  they  are  Conditions ,  and  jet  a. 
Caufa  fine  qua  non  of  our  f  unification  \  for  a  caufa  fine  qua 
non  ,  ii  no  Caufe  at  all  :  kut  a  Condition  in  a  Covenant  fir :tt I j 
taken-,  hath  a  Moral  efficiency^  and  u  a  Caufa  cum  qua  ,  not  a 
fine  qua  non. 

Anfiv.  I.  You  do  but //^mi^/o  J  and  that's  no  cogent  Argu- 
ment. I  think  otherwife ,  and  foyouareanfwered.  2.  And 
Lawyers  think  otherwife,  (  as  is  before  (hewed,  and  more  might 
be  )  and  fo  you  are  over-anfwered.  A  Condition  c^aa  talis 
C  which  is  the y?«^r/?  acception  j  is  no  Caufe  at  all  ;  though 
the  matter  of  it  may  be  meritorious,  among  men,  and  fo  caufal. 
If  you  will  not  believe  me,  nor  Lawyers,  nor  cuftom  of  fpcech, 
then  remember  at  leaft  what  it  is  thatL  mean  by  a  Condition  ,• 
and  make  not  the  difference  to  lie  where  it  doth  not.  Think  not 
your  felf  founder  in  matter  of  Dodiine  ,  but  only  in  the  fenfc 
of  the  Word  Q  Condition  3 ;  but  yet  do  fomewhat  firft  to  prove 
that  too  •  viz.,  that  a  Condition  as  fuch,hath  a  moral  efficiency. 
Prove  that  if  you  are  able. 

Treat,  ib.  If  Adnm  h^td  flood. in  hU  intea^ritv^  though  th.U  con- 
firmation Vi>ould  have  been  of  grace  ^  jet  kis  works  wculd  have  been 
a caufiill  (Condition  of  the  hle\\e^nefs  promifed.  In  the  Covenant  of 
Crace^  though  Vehat  nxin  doth  ii  by  the  gift  of  God^  jet  Uok^  Hpon 

the 


tkefami  gift  as  our  duty  ,  and  as  a  Condition  ,  rvhichinottr  fer- 
fons  u  ptrjormtd  ,  This  inferrethfome  Moral  Efficiency. 

An[w.  I.  See  then  ail  you  that  are  accounted  Orthodox,  the 
multitude  of  Proreftant  Divines  that  have  made  either  Faith  or 
Repentance  Conditions,  what  a  cafe  you  have  brought  your 
felves  into-    And  rt  Joyce  then  all  you  that  have  ag.iinlt  them 
maintained  that  the  Covenant  of  Grace  hath  on  our  part  no 
Conditions ;  for  your  Caufe  is  better  then  fome  have  made  you 
believe  :  and  in  particular,  this  Reverend  Author.    Yea  fee 
what  a  cafe  he  hath  argued  himfelf  inro ,  while  he  hath  argued 
you  out  of  the  danger  that  you  were  fuppofcd  in  :  i-or  lie  him- 
felf writeth  againft  thofc  that  make  Repentance  to  be  bttt  a  fign^ 
and  deny  it  to  ke  a  Condition  to  cjualifie  tbefubjeEifor  lajl  fictition. 
Treat,  of  ^ujlif.  pzrt.  i.  Le^.  20.  And  he  faith  thaz  in  fame 
grofs  fins  thtre  are  many  Conditions  requifite  (  be  fides  humiliati- 
on )  rtithout  rvbich  pardon  of  fin  cannot  be  obtained :  and  inftan- 
ceth   in    refiitmion.    pag.    210.  with  many    the    like  paf- 
fages. 

2.  Either  you  mean  that  Adams  ft-orks  would  have  been 
Caurall^«4lf««/a  Condition  performed, or  elfe  ^uatenus  McriiO' 
rious  ex  natnra  materia -,  or  fome  Other  caufe  :  The  firft  I  ftill 
deny,  and  is  it  that  you  fhould  prove,  and  not  go  on  with  na- 
ked affirmations :  The  fecond  I  will  not  yield  you,  as  to  the  no- 
tion of  meritoriou":, though  it  be  nothing  to  our  queftion.  The 
fame  I  fay  of  your  later  inftance  of  Gofpel  Conditions.  Prove 
them  morally  efficient,  ^ua  tales,  if  you  can. 

Treat,  ib.  Anifo^  though  in  words  they  deny,  jet  in  died  they 
do  cxalc  tpork^s  to  fome  kind  of  caufnlity. 

Ar.f\^.  I  am  pfrfwaded  you  fpeak  not  this  out  of  malice  : 
but  is  it  not  as  unkind  and  unjufl,  as  if  I  fhould  perfwade  men 
that  you  make  God  the  Author  of  fin  indeed^  though  you  deny 
itinjfcjr^i  ?  I.  What  h&iht  Deeds  that  you  know  my  mind  by 
to  be  contrary  to  my  Wor^i  ?  Speak  out,  and  tell  the  world.and 
fpare  me  not.  But  if  it  be  words  that  you  fet  againft  words, 
I.  Why  fhould  you  not  bclieve'my  Negations,  as  well  as  my 

(fup. 


Cu8) 


(fuppofed)  affirmations.    Am  I  credible  only  whenlfpcak 
amifs,  and  not  at  all  when  I  fpeak  right  ?  A  charitable  judgc- 
Hicntl  2.  And  which  fliou  d  you  take  to  be  indeed  my  fenfe?  A  na- 
ked term  K^ondition]  expounded  by  you  that  never  faw  ray 
heart  ?  and  therefore  know  not  howl  underftand  it ,  further 
then  1  tell  }0u  j  Or  racher  my  f.v/j/f/';  expLcAtim  of  that  term 
in  a  fenfe  contrary  to  your  fuppolicion.    hear  all  you  that  are 
impartial,  and  judge  \   I  fay  \_  -^  Condition  u  ko  (^aufe]  and 
J[_  Faith a*idRepe»tattce  are  Condi'.ioKs.'^  My  Reverend  Brother 
tells  you  now,  that  in  n-ordl  deny  them  to  be  efficient  Caufes, 
buti-j  t^ff^I  makethem  fu:h,  tj*.  1  make  them  to  be  what  I 
deny  them  to  be.  Judge  between  us,as  you  fee  caufe.   Suppofe 
1  fay  that  [  Scripture  t^  Sacred']  and  withall  I  add  that  by  Sa- 
cred^ I  mean  thatwhich  is  related  to  God, as  proceeding  from 
him,  and  feparated  to  him  :  and  I  plead  Etyraologie,  and  the 
Authority  of  Authors,  and  Cuftom  for  my  fpecch.    if  ray  Re- 
verend Brother  now  will  contradid  me  only  as  to  the  fitnefs  of 
.  the  word,  and  fay  thi^t facer  fignificth  only  execrahUis,\  will  not 
be  offended  with  him,  though  I  will  not  believe  him  :  but  fhould 
fogood  and  wife  a  man  proclaim  in  print,  thAZ  facer  (ignifieth 
only  execrabilis ,  and  therefore  that  though  in  rvordl  call  Scri- 
pture Sacred,  yet  in  deed  I  make  \i  execrable ^  I  fhould  fay  this 
were  unkind  dealing.    What  !  plainly  to  fay  that  a  Verba/ con- 
troverfic  is  a  Real  one  •,  and  that  contrary  to  my  frequent  pub- 
lifbed  profefTions  /  What  is  this  but  to  fay,  ivhitever  hefai:h,I 
kno^  hi4  heart  to  be  contrary.   Should  a  man  deal  fo  with  your 
felf  now,  he  hath  fomewhat  to  fay  for  it  :  For  you  firfl  pro- 
fcfs  Repentance  and  Re/lirutiov  to  be  a  Conditim  f  as  I  do  j  and 
when  you  have  done, profcfs  Co/iditlons  to  hive  a  Mcr.-il  Effici- 
ency (  which  I  deny  }  :  But  what's  this  to  me  ,  that  am  not  of 
your  mind  ? 

Treat,  pag.  no.  A  fifth  Arj^idment  it  that  which  fo  much 
fcundf  in  all  'Book^s.  If  gjod  workj  be  the  fffctfl  aid  fruit  of  our 
fuffification,  then  they  cannot  be  (^onditi)ns^or  Caufa  fine  qua  non 
of  our  lufl^ fixation.  Bn^SfLQ. 

«y^nlw»  I .  I  deny  the  Minor  in  the  fenfe  of  your  par:y ;  Our 

firfl 


(up) 


firft  Repentance  ,  our  firft  defire  of  Chrift  as  our  Saviour, 
»nd  Love  to  him  as  a  Saviour ,  and  our  firft  difclaimingofali 
other  Saviours,and  our  firft  accepting  him  as  Lord  and  Teacher, 
and  as  a  Saviour  from  the  Power  of  fin,  as  well  as  the  guilt ; 
all  thefe  are  works  with  you  •  and  yet  all  thcfe  are  not  theef- 
fedsof  our  Relative  Juftificationj  nor  any  of  them. 

2.  As  to  External  ads  and  Confequent  internal  afls,  I  deny 
your  Confequence, taking  it  of  continued  or  final  Juftitication ; 
though  I  eafily  yield  it  as  to  our  Juflification  at  the  firft  i .  All 
t*ie  ads  of  juftifying  faith,  befidcs  the  firft  ad,  are  as  truly 
cffedsof  our  firft  Juflification  as  our  other  graces  or  gracious 
ads  are.  And  doth  it  therefore  follow  that  they  can  be  no 
Conditions  of  our  continued  Juflification  ?  Why  not  Condi- 
tions as  well  as  Inftrumcnts  or  Caufes  ?  Do  you  think  that  on- 
ly the  firft  inftantaneous  ad  of  faith  doth  juliifie,  and  no  other 
afcer  through  the  courfe  of  our  lives  ?  1  prove  the  contrary^ 
fromtheinfianceof  Abraham:  It  was  not  the  firft  ad  of  his 
faith  that  P^w/mentioneth  when  he  proveth  from  him  Juftifica- 
tion  by  faith.  As  its  no  good  Confequence  [  Faith  afterward 
ii  the  tjfe^  of  Iu(iification  before  ;  tkirefore  it  cannot  afterward 
jujiifie,  or  be  a  CoKdition.  ]  So  its  no  good  Confequence  as  to 
Repentance,  Hope,  or  Obedience.  2.  It  only  follows  that  they 
cannot  be  the  Condition  of  that  Juftification  whereof  they  are 
the  effed,  and  which  went  before  them  (which  is  granted  you.) 
But  it  follows  not  that  they  may  not  be  the  Condition  of  conti- 
nued or  final  Juftification.  Sucking  the  breft,  did  cot  caufe  life 
in  the  beginning:  therefore  it  is  not  a  means  to  continueit :  It 
'  followeth  no,t.  You  wefl  teach  that  the  Juftification  at  the  laft 
Judgement  is  the  chief  and  raoft  eminent  Juftification.  This 
hath  more  Conditions  then  your  firft  pardon  of  fin  had,  yea  as 
many  as  your  falvation  hath,  as  hath  been  formerly  proved, 
and  may  be  proved  more  at  large. 

Treat,  pag  230.  Bjf  this  we  may  fee  that  more  things  are  re- 
4}U\redto  our  Salvation^  then  to  our  lufiificatiou  j  to  be  pojfeffors 
of  heaven ,  and  ( thM  it  pjould  be  )  to  entitle  m  thert" 
to. 


(I30) 


Anfif.  I.  Ttstrue,as  toour  firft  Juftifying  ;  and  ics  true  ts 
to  our  pvefent  continued  ftacc  :  becaufc  perfeverance  is  ftill  rc- 
quifite  CO  faWation.  But  its  not  tiueas  toour  final  fentcntial 
ju'hfication  :  i  here  is  as  much  on  our  part  required  to  that,  as 
to  falvation  it  felf.  i .  The  promife  makes  no  difference.  2. The 
nature  of  the  thing  doth  put  it  part  doubt.  Iror  what  is  our  fi- 
nal Juftihcation,  but  a  Determination  of  the  Queftion  by  pub- 
lick  fcntence,  on  our  fide  ,  Whether  vce  have  Right  tofaivatUn 
w  not  ?  The  25  •  of  Matthev  (hews  the  whole. 

2.1  argue  againft  you  from  your  own  Dodrine  here,  thus ; 
If  Juftificationbeitthat  gives  us  Right  or  Title  to  falvation, 
then  that  which  is  the  Condition  of  our  Right  to  falvation  ,  is 
the  Condition  of  our  Juftification  :  the  Antecedent  here  is 
your  own  Dodlrinc,  and  is  partly  true  :  And  the  Confequcnce 
is  undcnyable;  whereto  I  add,  QBut  the  Doing  of  Chrifls 
Comraandmencs  is  the  Condition  of  our  Right  to  falvation  : 
therefore  alfo  of  our  Right  to  Juftification,  w«.  as  Confum- 
rnate.   The  Minor  I  prove,  from  Rev.  22.  14.  Blejfed  are  they 
that  do  hid  CommandemeMts^  that  they  ntaji  have  Eight  to  the  tra 
of  life,  andmaj  enter  ini%iC.~\  TVhofoeverJhallcallon  the  MMme 
of  the  Lordjhallifefaved,  Rom.  10.  13.  Ads  2.  1 1.  We  are  fa- 
ved  by  hspe,  Rom.  8.  24.  Whofo  "^alketh  uf  rightly  pjall  befaved^ 
Prov.  28. 18.  BAptifmdothfaveus^  i  Pet.  3.  21.  [  /«  doir,gtHs 
thou  pjall  beth  fave  thj  felf  and  them  that  hear  thee.  ~\  l  fim. 
4.  16.  If  he  [^h^venot  ^orkj  ,  can  fttith  fave  him  ?  J  lames 
2.14. 

Treat,  ib.  Its  true,  that  Inflification  cannot  be  vcntinue^ina 
man^unlefs  hecor,tni4e  iv  goodworkj  :  ITetfoy-all  that  y  they  are 
not  Conditions  of  h'^  luflijiccnion  :  they  are  ^lualifioatioiis  and 
'Dcterm-ndt'ons  of  tht  Jubjefl  who  i^  jfsflified  '^  but  no  Cor.ditiont 
tff  hit  luflificfition.  As  in  the  gener/ition  of  man.  (^c.  Light  id 
necejf.rily  re(jHlred-,  and  drynef  ^  Oi  qualties  in  fire  ,  jet.  Sec. 

A»fx>.  I  Its  well  you  once  moreconfefs  that  the  thing  is  ne- 
cc-ffiry  I  C^ur  quelhonthcnisoiily  of  the  nature,  and  reafon 
of  that  neceflicy  ?  Whether  it  htnecijfttai  raedti  ad fiiew,^s  to 

the 


(I30 


tht  continuance  or  confummation  of  our  Juftification?  This  r 
hops  you  will  never  deny.  If  meoi'\  then  what  meAium'\%'\t} 
not  a  caufe.  If  not  acondlcion,  ihen  cell  us  what,  if  you 
can. 

'•  econdly,  You  fay  nothing  to  the  purpofe,  when  you  give  us 
Inftanccs  of  Natural  properties  and  qualifications.  For  bc- 
fides  that  fon[ie  of  them  arc  net  mtdia  (  as  Light  to  burning  ) 
the  reft  that  arc  wtdia^  arc  T/I^^y/M/// neceffary  adfinem:  But 
Firft,  Wc  arenotdifcourfingof  Phyficks ,  and  Phyfical  neccf. 
fities  ;  but  of  Morals,  and  moral  neccflity.  Secondly,  You  caa- 
not  here  pretend  f  or  at  leaft  prove  )  that  there  is  an  abfolutc 
Phyfical  iiccefliicy  adfinem  to  every  one  of  the  things  in  queftion 
to  their  end.  Thirdly,  Much  lefs  that  ths  is  the  neareft 
rcafon  o(  their Intercft,  and  that  God  bath  not  morally  fu- 
peridded  the  necefsity  of  a  Condition  by  his  Conftituti- 
on. 

I  prove  that  the  necefiity  is  moral.  Firft,  U  is  impofcd  by  way 
of  Precept,  which  caufeth  a  moral  ncceflity.  Secondly,  The 
Precept  hath  varied  at  the  pleafure  of  God  ,  there  being  more 
Duties  now,  then  formerly  were,  and  fome  ceafed  that  were  then 
impofed. 

Yea,  That  its  a  condition  having  neceflity  adfinem,  isevi- 
denr.  Firft,  Bccau'c it  is  rhe  wtfd'w;>r<»w»^<7«/j' impofed  onus 
by  God  as  Promifer  in  a  conditional  form  of  words,  as  neceflary 
to  our  attaming  of  the  benefit  prom'.fed.  [  //  thott  co»fe(s  VPtth 
thy  mcuth  the  Lord  fefnSy  and  h  Iteve  in  thj  heart  thut  God  raif- 
ed  him  from  the  dead^thouflja't  be  [AVtd  ^  Rom.  10.9.  If  jot* 
forgive  me*>  their  trefpalfes,  jour  heavenlj  Father  i^ilt forgive  jou^ 
&LQ.  ]  AUt.  64.  15.  Secondly,  And  it  is  not  of  Phyfical 
necelsi  y  ;  for  then  God  could  not  f^ve  u?  without  \i,  but  by  a 
Miracle.  Whereas  he  favcd  men  before  Chrift  by  believing  in 
a  il<^*j//j*»  in  generaljWithoutbel'veing  that  this  jefus  is  he,  and 
without  believing  thar  he  was  actually  conceived  by  the  Holy 
Ghoft,  born  of  the  Virgin  '/ary,  was  crucified,  buried  ,  rofe 
again,  afcended,  r^rc  Aid  he  faveeh  Infants^  that  themfclves 
believe  not  a:  all  ;  fo  that  ivhcn  you  fay  it  is  a  <jtt  Itfcnion  of  the 
fuitje^  y  you  mean  either  [  the  Juhje^  as  j^tjitfied^  and  that  is 
nothing  to  the  bufinefs:  for  then  the  quettion  is  not  whatRe- 

S  2  lation 


laiion  our  actions  have  to  that  which  is  paft,  but  to  that  which  is 
future.  Or  elfe  you  mean  the  [uhjeU:  ano  he  Ja/Iified  at  Jndgt' 
wetitf  or  here  to  befo  continueJ.  And  then  the  queftion  Hill  rcmain- 
cth,  whnher  thofe  qualifications  are  means  or  no  means  ?  /1»^ 
if  means,  of  \\>hat  fort,  if  not  conditions  ? 

Treat,  pag.  231.  The  Jixth  ^rgumerJ  :  If  Jufiifi'^ation 
ve  h)  ^orks  asaconaitioa  ,  then  one  mxn  is  more  or  lefs  fujiifed 
then  anothtr  j  and  thofe  wor^s  are  reejuired  to  one  mans  fftfii fixati- 
on whch  are  not  to  another,  (o  that  there  pjullnot  be  two  godl)  men 
in  the  >X>orld  fujiified  alike.  For  if  faith  Jufitfied  as  a  workj  then 
he  that  had  aflrongerfaith^  would  h  more  faflified  then  he  that 
hath  a  fceak^r. 

Anf'f^er.  Firft ,  I  grant  the  conclufion ,  if  you  had  taken 
Works  in  PWi  fenfc,  for  theworksof  ahirling,  or  any  that 
are  fuppofed  to  juftifieby  their  value. 

Secondly,  I  deny  your  firft  confequence  ;  And  I  give  you  the 
reafon  of  my  denyal  (  I  hope  a  little  better  then  yours  for  the 
proof  of  it  )  Firft,  It  \i  not  i\\t  degree oi  Repentance  or  Obe- 
dience that  is  made  the  Condition  of  our  continued  and  final. 
Juftification :  but  the  Sincerity.  Now  the  fincerity  is  the  fame 
thing  in  one  as  in  another  ;  therefore  one  is  no  more  juftified. 
hereby  then  another.  Secondly,  You  might  as  well  fay,  that 
different  degrees  o(  faiths  make  different  degrees  of  Juftifica- 
tion. But  that  is  not  juft,  becaufe  it  lies  all  on  the  fincerity;. 
therefore  it  is  as  unjuft  here  for  the  fame  reafon. 

Your  Reafon  is  fuch  as  I  expcded  not  from  you.  [  For  if 
Faith  (  fay  you  )  juftif-e  as  a  work^  \  But  who  faith  it  doth  ;«- 
jiifie  as  a  work^  ?  Your  Reader  that  fufpefteth  nothing  ^^but  fair 
in  your  words,  may  think  I  do;  when  I  have  again  and  again  in 
rfrw/»«difavowedit.  And  do  you  think  it  is  a  cogent  rea- 
fon indeed,  [^  //  workj  or  faith  jufiifie  as  a  conditions,  there  ^ill 
he  various  degrees  offujiification  :  Becaufe  if  it  ju/lifie  as  a  work, 
there  will  he  various  degree}.  ]  The  reafon  of  the  Confequence 
is  as  ftrange  to  me  ,  as  <a  hacu/o  adangt^lum.  Once  more  :  Firfl, 
Faith  do''  not  juftifie  as  a  Phyfical  ad :  Secondly,  Nor  as 
a  Moral  ad,  or  virtue  in  general.  Thirdly,  Nor  ai   a  merccna- 

ry 


(1^0 

ry  meritorious  a^.  Fourthly,  Eut  as  an  afl  adapted  to  the  ob- 
jed,  and  fpecully  fitted  to  this  gratious  defign  ,  it  is  choren  to 
be  the  condition,  and  repentance  and  fcif-denyal  accordingly  to 
attend  it.  Fifthly,  And  as  the  appointed  condition,  we  are 
juftified  by  it.  Sure  therefore  it  doth  not  juftifie  as  a  work. 
But  how  they  will  avoid  your  confequence  that  fay  it  juftifieth  as 
an  Inftrument,  let  them  fee.    * 

As  to yonr Confequence,!  anfAcr.Firft,  That  which  is  ab- 
foIutelynecefTaryjisfincere  Repentance  and  fincere  Obedience; 
and  this  is  the  fame  in  all.  Secondly,  But  the  matter  of  both 
thefe,  VIZ.  the  fins  repented  of,  and  the  duties  of  Obedience 
may  differ  in  many  particulars  in  feveral  perfons.  One  may 
nothave  the  fame  fins  to  Repent  of  as  another,  and  one  may 
have  fome  particular  duties  more  then  another :  though  in  the 
main,  all  have  the  fame  fin  and  duty.  But  this  difference  is  no 
abfurdity,  nor  ftrnnge  thing.  When  Chrift  mentioneth  the 
final  Juftitication  of  Tome,  Mat.  25.  and  gives  the  reafon  from 
their  works  [_  for  J  ^'as  hungry  aytdyefedme^  &c.  ]  I  read  of 
none  that  took  it  for  an  abfurdity,  becaufe,  Firfl,  The  poor. 
Secondlyj  Infants.  Thirdly,  Thofe  that  dye  before  they  have 
opportunity,  do  no  fuch  works. 

Treat,  p.^^.  33  I.  The  ftventh  y^rgument.  Thid  yijfertlon 
according  to  the  ftnfe  of  the  /ate  IVriters  (  that  a'e  otherWife 
Orthodox^  for  I  meat  not  the  Socinians  )  \\>ill  bnKg'm  ajtijii- 
ficationt^o  ^a'les,  or  make  a  tveofotd  Ju/}ificatio»,  whereof  one 
will  be  ntedlefs.  For  thfy  grant  an  ImfntAtion  of  Chrift s  Right e- 
oufnefi  in  refpt^  cf  the  Law  ;  he  falfil/edthat^  and  fat  is  fled  Cods 
J  ft  (lice  i  thit  the  Ln\^  cannot  accufe  tts-  ^^nd  be  fides  thai  ,they 
make  an  Evangelical  perfonal  Righteoufnefs  by  our  ovpk  £van- 
gelical  workj.  Now  cert  i  in  I j  this  later  is  rvholly  [uperfltispcs ; 
for  if  Chrijts  RighteoHfinefs  be  abundantly  able  to  fatisfie  for  all 
that  righteotifiefs^hich  the  La^  retjuireth  of  us ;  '^hat  is  the 
matter  that  it  removethnot  all  our  Evangelical  failings  ^  a-'dfup- 
fly  that  righieoufnefs  aljo?  furelytbis  is  to  make  the  ^ars  p.iney 
^hen  the  Sun  is  in  itsfuHluftre.  Thus  it  may  be  obferved^  \\>hi/e 
men  for  feme  feeming  difficulty  avoid  the  good  known  way  cf  truths 
the  J  dj  commpulj  bring  in  C^jfertions  of  far   more  difficulty 

S  3  ri>' 


C'34-) 


to  te  received.  lu  this  cafe  its  far  more  eajie  to  mdintMn 
one  Jingle  RighteoHjnefi^  viz.  the  Obedience  of  onr  Lord  Chriji^ 
thentomal^e  t^o,  &c. 

-^k/w.  Firft,  This  twofold  Righteoufnefs  is  fo  far  from  be- 
ing needlefs,  that  all  (hall  perifli  in  cverlafling  torment  that 
have  not  both.  I  doubt  not  but  you  have  both  your  felf;  and 
therefore  do  but  argue  wich  all  this  confidence  againft  that  which 
you  muft  be  faved  by,  and  which  you  carry  within  you.  As  if 
you  (liould  argue  that  both  a  heart  and  a  brain  are  needlefs, 
and  therefore  certainly  you  have  but  one.  But  the  beft  is»  con- 
cluding you  have  but  one,  doth  not  really  prove  that  you  have 
but  one  ;  for  if  it  did,  it  would  prove  you  had  neither  j  and 
then  you  were  but  a  dead  man  in  one  cafe,  and  a  loft  man  in  the 
other.  Firft,  Did  ever  any  man  deny  the  neceflky  of  inhe- 
rent Righteoufnefs ,  that  was  called  aProteflant.^  Obje^f  But 
thats  nothing  to  its  ncceffity  to  Juftification.  e^w/tt'.  Firft,  Its 
the  very  being  of  it  that  you  plead  againft  as  needlefs,  if  your 
words  are  intelligible.  2ly.  Itsasgrofs  acontradiftion  to  talk  of 
a  Righteoufnefs  that  makes  not  righteous,  or  will  not  Juftifie  in 
tantum,  according  to  its  proportion,  as  to  talk  of  wbitnefsthat 
makes  not  white,  or  Paternity  that  makes  not  a  father,  or  any 
form  that  doth  not  inform,or  is  a  form,  and  ts  rot  a  form. 

Secondly ,If  there  be  two  diftind  Laws  or  Covenanrs^then  there 
isa  necefsity  of  two  dftinft  HighteoufnefTc*  to  our  JufttHcatian. 
But  the  Antecedent  is  certain.  I  fuppofe  it  will  be  granted  that 

Chrifts  righteoufnefs  is  ncceffary  to  anfwer  the  Law  of  works. 
J^.ndl  (hall  further  prove  that  a  perfonal  righteoufnefs  given 
from  Chrift  jsnccelTary  to  fulfil!  the  condition  of  the  new  Cove- 
rant  or  Law  of  Grace,  btLeve  and  be  faved  ^SiC. 

Thirdly,  Chiiftdid  rot  himfelf /«//7//  the  condition  of  the 
Gofpel  for  an/  man,  nor  fatisficfor  his  final  non-performance  ; 
therefore  he  that  will  be  faved,  mu(V  perform  it  himelf  or  pe- 
ri(h.  '1  hat  Chrift  performed  it  not  in  perfon,  is  paft  doubt.  It 
was  not  confi'tent  wirh  his  ftate  and  perfeftion  tor(-pentof 
fin,  who  had  none  to  repent  of  ^  roreturnf  om  fin  to'^od, 
who  never  fell  from  him;  to  beleve  in  Chrift  Jc-fu%  that  is  to  ac- 
cept himfelf  as  an  offered  Saviour,  and  to  tske  himfelf  as  a  Savi- 
our 


I 


C3'0 


our  to  himrdf,  that  is,is  one  that  redeemed  himfelf  from  fin,to 
deny  his  own  righteoufnefs,  toconfefshis  fm^  to  pray  for  par- 
don of  it,    &c.  Do  you  ferioufly  believe  that  Chrift  hath  done 
this  for  any  man  ?   For  my  part,  I  do  not  believe  ic.  Secondly, 
Thar  he  that  hath  not  fatisfied  for  any  mans  final  predominant 
Infidelity  and  Impenircncy,  )  know  you  will  grant,  becaufey^u 
will  deny  that  be  dyed  for  any  fin  of  that  perfon  f  or  at  leaft, 
your  party  will  deny  ir.  )     Thirdly,  All  that  iliall  be  faved,do 
adually  perform  thefe  conditions  themfclves.     I  know  you  will 
confcfsir,  that  none  (adult)  but  the  Pentcenr,  Bel. cvcrs,  Holy, 
(hall  be  faved.This  fort  of  Righteoufnefs  therefore  is  of  neceflity. 
Fourthly,  The  Benefits  of  ^^^hnlh  obedience  and  death  are 
made  over  to  men  by  a  conditional  P.omife,  Deed  of  gifc^or 
aft  of  oblivion.     Therefo  e  the  condition  of  that  Grant  or 
Aft  mui' be  found  beforeany  man  canbe  iuftifiedbythe  righ. 
teoufncfs  of  C  hrift.    It  is  none  of  yours  till  you  repent  and  be- 
lieve :  therefore  you  muft  have  the  perfonal  Righteoufnefs  of 
faith  and  repentance,  in  fubordination  to  the  imputed  righte- 
oufnefs, that  it  may  be  yours.    And  will  yeu  again  conclude, 
that  [  Ceru'mly  this  later  tj  Wh^>/i)'/tfpnfiu^l>ts.'^R^ith  not  God 
faid  ?  ]Hethat  bclievtih^  Poallbt  JAVtd  \  and  he  thai  bUieveth  not, 
pjaU  be  damned.']    And  Repent  and  be  converted^  th  it  jonr  fins 
ma.y  be  bhttedottt.  &c.  ~]     Is  it  not  ncccffary  that  chefe  be 
done  then,  both  as  duty  commanded,  and  as  a  condition  or 
fome  means  of  the  end  propounded  and  promifed  ?  And  is  this 
whollv'fuperfluoui?    In  Judgement,  if  you  be  accufed  to  have 
beeii  finally  impenitent,  or  an  Infidel,  wjl' vpu  not  plead  yonc 
perfona!  faitb  and  repenrance,  to  juftifie  yOTragainft  that  accu- 
fation  ?    or  fhill  any  be  faved  that  faith,  []  /  did  not  refsnt  or 
btlici'f^  b:it  C^nft  did  for  me  ?  ]]  If  it  be  faid  that  [_  C  hrifis  fa- 
tisf.iSiion  id  fujficient ;  but  vhats  that  to  tbee  that  jierformedji  not 
the  conrUtiom  of  bti  Covenant,  and  therefore  hajl  no  pjyt  in  it .  ?  J 
Will  yo  J  not  produce  your  faith  and  repentance  for  your  Juiti- 
ficition  agiinll  this  charge,  and  (o  to  prove  your  Intereft  in 
Chrift?  Nay  is  it  like  to  be  the  great  bufinefs  of  th\c  day  to 
enquire  whether  Chrift  have  done    his   pirt  orno  ?     or  yet 
to  enquire,  whetherthe  world  were  finncrsl*  or  rather  to  judge 
them  according  to  the  terms  of  grace  which  were  rcvealetJi 

so* 


Ci3<5) 


to  them,  and  lo  try  whether  they  have  part  in  Chrift  or  norland 
to  that  end,  whether  they  believed,  repented,  loved  him  in  his 
members,  improved  his  Talents  of  Grace. or  not  ?  Or  can  any 
thing  but  the  want  of  this  perfonal  righteoufnefs  then  hazard 
a  mans  foul  ? 

But  you  ask  [  Jf  Chrifisrlgtoteottfntfs  he  ahlt  to  [atvfie^vehat 
u  the  matter  that  it  removeth  not  all  our  Evangelical  failings  / 
/&c.]/^»/>r.Eithcr  you  ask  this  qucRion  as  of  Sl penitent  'Believer, 
or  the  finally  impenitent  Unbeliever .     If  of  the  former,  1  fay, 
Fir[\,  All  his  fins  Chrifts  righteoufnefs  pJrdoneth  and  coveretb  j 
and  confequently  ail  the  failings  in  Gofpel  dutie«.   Secondly, 
But  his  predominant  final  Impenitency  and  Infidelity  Chrift 
pardoneth  not,  becaufe  he  is  not  guilty  of  it;   he  hath  none 
fuch  to  pardon  j  but  hath  the  perfonal  righteoufnefs  of  a  per- 
former of  the  conditions  of  the  Gofpel;    And  for  the  finally 
impenitent  Infidels,    theanfweris,  becaufe  they  rejcfted  that 
Righteoufnefs  which  was  able  to  fatisfie,    and  would  not  return 
to  God  by  him^indfonot  performing  the  condition  of  pardon, 
have  neither  the  pardon  of  that  fin,  nor  of  any  other  which 
were  conditionally  pardoned  to  them. 

If  this  Doftrine  be  the  avoiding  the  good  known  way, there  is 
a  good  known  way  befides  that  which  is  revealed  in  the  Gofpel  .* 
And  if  this  be  fo  hard  a  point  for  you  to  receive,  IblefsGod, 
it  is  not  fo  to  me.  And  if  it  be  far  more  eafie  to  maintain  one 
iinglc  righteoufnefs,  viz..  imputed  only  ^  it  w»ll  not  prove  fo 
f<tfe  as  e'ife.  If  one  righteoufnefs  may  ferve,  may  not  Pilate 
zn^Simon  CMagus  be  juftified.if  no  man  be  put  to  prove  his  part 
in  it?and  if  he  be,?»#yv  ftiall  he  prove  it,but  by  his  performance  of 
the  conditions  of  iheSiff. 

Treat,  pag.  .2^2.  Argu.  2.  Th^t  cannot  ha  condition  ef 
fafli^catioK  ,  ^hich  it  [elf  neecieth  fuflification  :  'Sht  good 
V^orki  being  imperf eB ^and  having  much  drofslcleaving^nted  ajufii^ 
:f  cation  to  take  that  guilt  a^a/. 

jinf^^.  Firft  Again,  hearken  all  you  that  have  fo  long  de- 
iiyed  the  Covenant  to  have  any  conditions  at  all  ;  Here  is  an 
.Argument  to  maintain  your  caufc :  for  it  makes  as  much  againft 

faith 


Ci?7) 


faith  a?  any  other  aftsC  which  they  call  works)  for  faith  is 
imperfed  alfo,  and  needs  juftificationX  a  pardon  I  fupporeyou 
mean;  I  had  rather  talk  oi  par^oftwg  my  fins,  ih^n  jujl if jing 
them,or  any  imperfeftions  what  ever. ) 

Secondly,  But  indeed  iti  too  grofs  a  fliifc  to  help  your  caufe , 
The  Major  IS  falfc,  and  hath  nothingto  tempt  a  man  to  believe 
it  that  I  can  fee.  Faith  and  Repentance  arecunfiderabfe.Firft, 
Asfinccre.  Secondly,  As  imperfed-  They  are  not  the  condi- 
tions of  pardon  as  imperfen:  ^  but  asjjucere.  God  doth  not 
fay  [  /  W///  pardon  you  tf  joft  rvUl  not  ptrfeHly  helieve,  ]  but 
C  ^f  1°^*  -ivill  bclkve.  1  Impcrfedion  is  fin  :  and  God  makes  not 
fin  a  condition  of  pardon  and  life.  lam  notable  to  conceive 
what  it  was  that  in  your  mind  could  feem  a  fufficiennt  reafon  for 
this  Propofition  ,  that  nothing  can  be  a  condition  that  needs  a 
pardon.  Its  true,  that  in  the  fame  refped  as  it  needs  a  pardon  ; 
that  is,  as  k  is  a  fin,  it  can  be  no  condition.  "But faith  m  fAtth,  Re- 
pentance tii  Repentance  is  no  ^n. 

Trea-t.  ibid.  Its  true,  fujiification  ii  properly  of  perfons^and  of 
a^lions  indireflly  and  obli^mly . 

An(^.  The  clean  contrary  is  true,  as  of  Juftification  in  gene- 
ral, and  as  ^imong  men,  ordinarily.  The  adion  is  firft  accufa- 
fable,  or  jaftifiablc ,  and  fo  the  perfon  as  the  caufe  of  that 
Adion.  But  in  our  Juftification  by  Chrifts  fatisfadion,  ouc 
Adion?  arenot  juftifiable  at  all,  fave  only  that  we  have  per- 
formed the  condition  of  the  Gift  that  makes  bis  rightcoufnefs 
ours. 

Treat,  p^g,  235.  This  <jneJ}ion  therefore  is  again  and  again  to 
leprcpunded  :  If  woodworks  be  the  condition  of  cur  ffi/iification, 
how  coma  the gui/t  in  them  that  deferveth  ccndemnation  to  be  done 
away  ?  Is  there  ^t  ftsrther  condition  renffdlredto  this  condition  ?  and 
fo  another  to  that  with  a  proceffus  in  infinitum  } 

Anf^.  Once  may  ferveturn,  for  any  thing  regardabic  that 
I  can  perceive  in  it. But  if  fo.again  and  again  you  (hall  be  anfwer- 
cd  •  The  Gofpel  giveth  Chrift  and  life  upon  the  fame  condition 

T  to 


CU8) 


no  all-,  This  condition  is  fiift  a  duty,  and  then  a  condition.  As 
n  duty  we  perform  it  imperfedly  and  fo  finfully  :  for  the  per- 
fection of  it  is  a  duty,  but  the  perfedion  is  not  the  condition,, 
but  the  fincerity.  Sincere  Repentance  and  faith  it  the  conditi- 
on of  the  pardon  of  all  our  fins :  therefore  of  their  own  Im- 
perfections, which  are  fins.  Will  you  ask  now  [  Jf  faitkbe 
imfirfeH ^  ^oft'  comes  the  gwlt  of  th^t  Imperfetlionto  be  pardoned  ?. 
ii  it  by  a  further  co'^dition^  andfo  in  infinitum  ?  ~\  No  :  it  is  on 
tht  fame  condition  :  lincere  repentance  and  faith  are  the  condi- 
tions of  a  pardon  for  their  oi*n  Imperfedions.  Is  there  any 
difficulty  in  this ,  or  is  there  any  doubt  of  it  ?  Why  may  not 
faith  be  a  condition,as  well  as  aninftrunent  of  receiving  the  par» 
don  of  itsownlmperfeftion?  1  hope  ftill  you  perceive  that  you 
put  thefe  queftions  to  othef  s  as  well  as  me,  and  argue  againft  the 
common  Judgement  of  Proteitants,  who  make  that  which  is  im- 
perfect, to  be  the  condition  of  pardon,  Q  Repent  and  be  bap- 
UK.ed  (  faith  Peter  )  for  the  remiffion  of  Jin ;  Of  what  fin  ?  is  any 
excepted  to  the  Penitent  Believer  ?  certainly  no  :  It  is  of  all  fins. 
And  is  not  the  imperfeflion  of  fakb  and  repentance  a  fin  ?  The 
fame  we  fay  of  fincerc  obedience  as  to  the  continuance  of  our 
Juftification,or  the  not  lofing  it,and  as  to  our  final  Juftification. 
If  we  fincerely  obey,  God  will  adjudge  us  tofalvarion,  andfo 
juftifie  us  by  his  final  fentcnce,  through  the  blood  of  Chrift 
from  all  the  imperfections  of  that  obedience;  what  need 
therefore  of  running  any  further  towards  an  infinitum? 

Treat,  ibid.  The  'Topijh  party  and  the  Caflellians  are  fo  far 
convinced  of  this,  that  therefore  they  fuj  our  good  work^  are  ptr- 
feH.And  CaftcUio  makes  that  prayer  for  pardon  not  to  belong  to  all 
the  godly. 

yUf^.  Tt  feems  ilvcy  are  partly  Qgaker?.  But  they  are  un- 
happy fouls,  if  fucb  an  Argument  could  drive  them  to  fuch  an 
abominable  opinion.  And  yet  if  this  that  you  affirm,  be  the 
caufc,  that  Pap. fts  have  taken  up  the  doctrine  of  perfection, 
Ihave  more  hopes  of  their  recovery  then  I  had  before;  nay,, 
becaufC;  they  are  fome  of  them  men  of  ordinary  capacities,  I 
2«]uC  it  as  if  ic  were.done  already.  For  the  Remedy  is  moft  ob- 
vious 5 


039) 


viousi  Underftand,  PapiHs,  that  ic  is  Faich  -and  Repentance  and 
Obedience  to  Chrift  in  Truth,  and  not  in  Perfedion  that  is  the 
Condition  of  your  final  Juftification  at  Judgement  , 
and  you  need  not  plead  for  perfcdion  any  more.  But 
I  hardJy  believe  you,  that  this  is  the  caufe  of  their  error  in  this 
point. 

And  you  may  fee  that  if  Proteftants  had  no  more  Wic 
tJicn  Papifts  ,  they  muft  all  be  driven  by  the  violence  of 
your  Argument,  to  hold  that  Faith  and  Repentance  are  per- 
feft. 

And  feeing  you  tell  us  of  Cafiellio'i  abfurdity,  I  would  intreat 
you  to  tell  us,  why  it  is  that  you  pray  for  pardon  your  felvesiei- 
ther  you  take  Trayer  to  be  Means  to  obtain  pardon,  or  you 
donot:If  notithen  i.  Pardon  is  «o»^  of  your  end  in  praying  foe 
pardon,    a.    And  then  if  once  it  be  taken  for  no  means,  men 
cannot   be   blamed    if  they  ufe  ic  but  accordingly.    But  if 
you  do  ufe  it  as  a  means,  then  what  means  isic?  Is  Prayer  any 
caufeof  Pardon  >  fay  fo>  and'you  fay  more  then  we  that  you 
condemn>  and  fall  under  all  thofe  ccnfures  thsit  per  fas  aut  nefas 
aj:€  caft  upon  us.      If   it  be  no  caufe  of  pardon  ;     Is  it  a  con- 
dition fine  qti*  non^  as  to  that  manner  of  pardoning  that  youc 
prayer  doth  intend  ?    If  you  fay  yea,    you  confequemially 
recant  your  difputation  (  or  Leflure  )  and  turn  into  the  tents  of 
the  Opinionifts.    But  if  it  be  no  condition  of  pardon ,  then 
tell  us  what  means  it  is  if  you  can.    If  you  fay,  it  is  a  duty. 
I  anfwer,    Duty  and  Means  are  commonly  diftinguiflied,  and 
fo  is  necejfitas  practpti  &  medii.    Duty  as  fucb,  is  no  means  to 
an  end,  but  the  bare  ifefult  of  a  command.     Though  all  Duty 
that  God  comraandeth  is  alfo  fome  means,  yet  that  is  notf«4 
Duty.     And  fo  far  as  that  Duty  is  a  means,  it  is  either  a  Captfe, 
(near  or  remote)  or  a  Condition  ^  either  of  the  obtain  ment 
of  the  benefit,  fimply,  or  of  the  more  certain,  or  fpeedy,  or 
eafic  attainment  of  it,    or  of  obtaining  fome  inferiour  good, 
that  conduceth  to  the  main.     So  that  ftill  it  is  a  Caufe  or  a  Con- 
dition, if  a  means.    If  you  fay,  lus^n  Antecedey.t.  1  fay.  ^«4 
/^/f,  that  isvio  means,  but  if  a  A^rcr/rir^  antecedent,  that  which 
isthereafon  of  ics  neceflity  may  make  ic  a  means.  If  you  go  to 
Phyricalprcrequifit€s(as  yoatalkt  of  a  mans  llioulders  bear- 

T   2  ing 


iflg  the  head  that  ht  may  fee,  ^c. )  yan  go  ^A'/n^  */V*^ ;   Tr» 

a  moral  means  chat  we  treat  of,  and  I  tliink  you  will  not  affirm 

Prayer  to  be  a  mear  s  of  phyfical  necefliiy  to  pardon.  If  it  were, 

it  muftbe  a  Phyfical  caufe,  near  or  remote,    or  a  Difjofiti^ 

ihAtina  of  natural  necefljty,  &c.  If   you   fay ,  that   prayer 

for  pardon,    is  ciifpofiiio  fuhjeEli^    I  anlwcr,   thats  it  that  we 

Opinionifls  do  arfirm  :  But  it  is  a  dlfp^fitto  mcralu^  and  necefla- 

ry  Ht  intd'iHm  aci  finem  :  and  that  neccllity  muft  beconflitured  by 

the  Promifer  or  Donor :    ar>d  that  can  be  only  by  his  rffcdus  pro' 

rnijfionis ,  which  makes  it  in  fome  meafure  or  other  a  condition 

of  th«  thing  promife4.  S'othatther-eis  rt<i  \o\vt:r  m6r^\  me^itnm 

ifecn  a  fneet  condition  fine  cjua  mov,  that  my  undctftandJngcan 

hitherto  find  out,  or  apprebend. 

Treat.     /^/W.     Paul  fafigeth  them  durq   ^d  draft  in  re 
ftrertce  to  Jtiffificmm  ;  ^ea  a//  things ^  Sec/--  "^ 

,-^«/»».  I'.  Sntt)^liat  arfe  {hofe  Ail  ifW^i?  '2.  And  what 
Keference  to  Juftification  is  it  ?  If  Ati things  fim^y  in  all  re-* 
larion  toJuRification,  then  he  muft  judge  the  G(^fpel  dungafrti 
drofs  as  to  thelnftrumental  collation  of  Juftification ;  and  the 
Sacranoents  dung  and  drofs  as  to  thefealing  of  it;and  the  Minfftry 
dung  and  drofs,  as  to  the  preaching  and  offering  it,  and  be- 
feeching  ra*n  to  be  reconciled  toUod  :"■  and  Faith  to  be  dung 
anddrofs^  as  to  the  receiving  of  it ;  as  well  as  Repentance  a:n<l 
I^aich  tobedorrg  and  drofs  as  conditions  of  it ;  or  Prayer, 
Obedience,  as  conditions  of  continuing  it.^ 

2.  Irs  evident  in  the  text  that  Pauls  fpcaksof  A II  things  thzt 
Mnd  in  oppofition  to  Chrift,  and  thatftandin  competition 
with  him,  as  fuch  ;  and  not  of  any  thing  that  ftands  in  a 
necefTdry  fubordination  to  him  as  fuch. 

3 .  He  exprefly  addeih  in  the  text,  [for  the  excellency  of  the 
klfowfedgeof  Chrift  fefns  my  Lord  ]  this  therefore  is  none  of  the 
\_(tll  things  that  are<a''^^l  for  the  AU  things  areoppofed  to 
this.  'And  itcontaineth  that  faith,  which  is  works  with  the 
Opponents :  for  this  is  more  then  a  recumbency  on  Chrift  as 
Prielt;  It  is  the  Knowledge  of  him  as  Zor^alfo.  I  am  confi- 
dent I  ftiill  never  learn  to  expound  TAttl  thus  Q  /  efeem  All 

things^ 


I 


C'40 

tliags,  eventheknovfle^geofChrifipfus  as  Lorel  dndTrtphtt'' 
as  dtmq  for  the  Krjo'ivled^e  of  him  ^s  Trie/}.']    Alfo  Pan/ here* 
excep:eth  his  ffijferlKg  the /of}  of  th-it  All.    I  am  confident  that 
the  i  t^^U  j  that  Paiil  fuffered  the  iofsof ,  comprehended  not 
bis  Self-denyal,  Repentance,  Prayer,  Charity,  Hope,  ^c. 

4.  It  is  not  only  '\n  reference  iofuflipc^iionxhu  Pard  defpi- 
feth  All  things  ;  but  it  is  to  the  aiming  of  Chrift  ("who  douln- 
lefs  is  the  Principle  of  Sanguification  as  well  as  (uftification  ) 
ind  to  he  found  in  him  t  which  containeth  the  fun  of  his  felici- 
ty. If  a  man  fhould  be  fuch  a  felf-contradider  as  to  fee  Repen- 
tance ,  or  Faith  in  Chrift,  or  Prayer  in  his  Name  ,  or  Hope  in 
him  ,  &c.  againft  winning  Chrift ,  and  againft  being  found  in 
him  ,  or  againft  the  knowledge  of  him  ,  let  that  man  fo  far 
efteem  his  faith,  hope,  prayer,  (^c.  as  dung.  If  you  fhould  fay, 
[^  /  account  all  things  dung  for  the  ^-iming  of  God  bimfelf  as  my 
feltcity.  ]  Would  you  have  me  interpret  you  thus ,  [^  I  account 
thtitve  of  Cod  dung  J  and  prayer  tohirOy  andfludiom  oheyhtg  him 
arJ  the  word  that  rtvealeth  htm,  3ic.  even  as  they  flan  dftthordi- 
nate  to  htm.  3  fbis  fame  P/j^/rcjoj  ced  in  the  reftifronj'  of  his 
coniii:ierce,thatin  fimplicity  and  godly  fincerity  he  had  had  his 
converfation  among  them  :  and  he  beat  or  fubdued  his  body 
and  brought  it  into  fubjedion  ,  left  he  fbould  be  Reprobated 
after  he  was  juftified,  and  he  prayed  for  pardon  of  fin,  and  telts 
Titmothy^  {^  Indoingthi^ thoHpj^lt fave thy fe!f ;  dec.  \  therefore 
thcfe  ihirvgsthus  ufed,  were  none  of  the  All  things^  that  be  op- 
fxrfed  to  the  knowledge  of  Chrift,  as  dung. 

Treat.  pag-2H, -H-  Orhenwotsld avoid  this  Ol>jeElio»\  hj 
fajing ,  th(tt  Cjojpl graces^  tvhich  are  the  Conditions  of  the  Cove- 
rant^  are  redncible  to  the  L^ar^  ani  fo  Chrifi  in  I  at  is f)  in  (r  the 
L-irVy  dcth  remove  the  imperfedions  cleaving  to  thent  :  And  they 
juige  it  abfurdtofay,  thit  Chrift  hath  fatisfied  for  the  fins  of  the 
ftcond  Covenant  y  or  breaches  .^  which  is  f aid  lo  he  onl)  fin^il  tsn- 
belief. 

Anfrfi.  As  this  is  brought  in  by  head  and  flioulders ,  fo  is  ic 
recited  lamely,  without  the  neceffary  diftindions  and  cxplicati- 

T  3  ons 


/ 


(14-2-) 


onsadjoyned,  yea  without  part  of  the  Sentence  ic  fclf :  and 
therefore  unfaithfully. 

Treat.  But  this  a<^fwer  may  be  c  a  lied  Legion ;  for  many  err  our  $ 
and co»iraitftwns  are  tn  it.  i .  Hovf  can JHJhfjin^  faith  qua  talis 
in  the  afi  of  f^flifytrtg^  and  Rep:tttatice  ,  he  reAncible  duties  to  the 
Lxvf  taken  JtrtU:lj  }  indeed  as  it  tpoa  in  a  large  fenfe  discovered  to 
thefeWf^hein^  the  (Covenant  of  Qrace  ^  at  I  have  elfe^irhere  pro- 
ved (  Vindic.  Lcgis  )  Jo  »■  required  fuliifjing  Faith  and  Rep  en- 
tar.ce.  3Ht  take  tt  in  the  fenfe  as  the  Abettor  of  this  opinion  mu[l: 
do  J  jfsflifjing  faith  ami  repentance  mnfi  be  called  the  workj  of  the 
Lav/. 

Anftv.  Its  eafilier  called  Legion  then  faithfully  reported,  oc 
folidly  confuted,  i.  Let  the  Reader  obferve  how muchi in- 
curred the  difpleafure  of  Mr.  Blake  ^  for  denying  the  Moral 
Law  to  be  the  fufficient  or  fole  Rule  of  all  duty,  and  how  much 
he  hath  faid  againfl  me  therein ;  and  then  fudge  how  hard  a  task 
it  is  to  pleafe  all  men  :  when  thefe  two  neighbours  and  friends, 
do  publikely  thus  draw  me  fuch  contrar/  waies ,  and  I  roaft  be 
guilty  of  more  then  ordinary  errour  whether  I  fay  Yea  or  Nay. 
And  yet  (  which  is  the  wonder  )  they  ditF^r  not  among  thcra- 
felves. 

2.  But  feeing  your  ends  dired  you  to  fetch  in  this  contro- 
vcrfie,  fo  impertinent  to  the  reft  ,  its  requifite  that  the  Abettor 
do  better  open  his  opinion,  then  you  have  done ,  that  the  Rea- 
der may  not  have  a  Defence  of  he  knows^t  what. 

My  opinion  fo  ofc  already  explained  in  other  writings,  is 
this. 

1 .  That  the  Law  of  Nature  as  continued  by  the  Mediator, 
is  to  be  diftinguifhed  from  the  Remedying  Law  of  Grace ,  call- 
ed the  N€W  Teftamentj  the  Promifc,  &e.  (  Whether  you  will 
call  them  two  Laws ,  or  two  parts  of  one  Law,  is  little  to  the 
purpofe ,  feeing  in  fome  refpsd  they  are  two,  and  in  fome  but 
one.  ) 

2.  That  this  continued  Law  of  Nature  hath  its  Precept  and 
SanSion,  ordothconftitutetheDuenefs,  i.  Of  Obedience  in 
general  to  all  that  God  hath  covimanded  or  (hall  command. 

2.  And 


0+5) 


2.  And  of  many  duties  in  particular,  g.  And  of  everlafting 
death  as  the  penalty  of  all  fin.  So  that  it  faith  ,  The  ^aget  of 
(in  ii  tieath. 

3.  That  to  this  is  affixed  the  Remedying  Law  of  Grace, 
like  an  ad  of  Oblivion,  which  doth  i.  Reveal  certain  points 
to  be  believed.  2.  And  command  the  belief  of  them,  with 
other  particular  duties  in  order  to  its  ends.  3.  And  doth  offer 
Chrift,  and  Pardon,  and  Life  ,  by  a  Conditional  Donation  en- 
ading  th?.t  whofocver  will  Repent  and  Believe  (hill  be  Juftified, 
and  perfevering  therein  with  true  obedience,  (hall  be  finally  ad' 
judged  to  everlafting  life,  and  poffcffed  thereof.  Its  tenor  is* 
He  that  Repentech  andBelieveth  (hall  be  faved  ,  and  he  that 
doth  not  fhall  be  damned. 

*  4.  That  the  fcnfe  of  this  Promife  and  Tbreatning  is,  Hs 
that  Reptfjteth  and'Believeth  at  alUn  this  life  ,  though  but  at  the 
laft  hour^jljdl  he  f^ved  ;  ayid  he  th^^t  doth  stnotatallJlyMlhe 
damned.  Or  he  that  iifound a  J^enitent  Believer  at  death  j  8cc. 
And  not,  he  that  believeth  not  today  or  tomorrow  (hill  be 
damned,  though  afterward  he  do. 

5.  That  the  threatning  of  the  Law  of  Nature  was  not  at 
firit  Peremptory  and  Remedilefs  ;  and  that  now  it  is  fo  far  Re-- 
medycd,  as  that  there  is  a  Remedy  at  hand  for  the  difTolvingof 
the  Obligation^  which  w.ll  be e fecSual  as  foon  as  the  Condimon: 
i$  performed. 

6.  That  the  Remedying  Law  of  Grace  ,  hath  a  peculiar  pe- 
nalty, that  is,  I.  Non-liberation,  A  privation  of  Pardon 
and  life  which  was  offered  (For that's  now  a  penal  privation-, 
which  if  there  had  been  no  Saviour,  or  Promife ,  or  Offer, 
would  have  been  but  a  Negation.  )  2.  The  certain  Remedilcf- 
nefs  of  their  mifcry  for  the  future  ,  that  there  fliall  be  no  mo'cc 
facrifice  for  fin.  3.  And  whether  alfo  a  greater  degree  of  pu-» 
ni(hmenr,  I  leave  to  confideration. 

7.  I  ftill  diftinguiftied  between  the  Precepts  and  the  Sanfiion 
oF  the  Law  of  Grace  or  New  Covenant,  and  between  fin  as 
itrcfpeAeth  both  :And  fol  faid,that  Repentance  and  ?ai:h  in 
Chrift  (even  as  a  means  to  Juftification;)  arecomraandcd  »«//>«■»- 
cisin  the  Gofpei, which  conftiruteth  them  duties, but  co mm and- 
€il confequenily  ingsnsrt-  intheiaw  of  nature'. under  the ge— 


CiH) 


neral  of  Obedience  to  all  parcicuUr  precepts  :  and  whether  al- 
fo  the  Law  of  Nature  require  the  duty  in  fpecie  ^  fuppv^fing 
•Jod  to  have  made  his  uipernatural  preparations  in  pr.M'iding 
and  propounding  the  objeds,  1  left  to  enquiry.  Accordingly  1 
affirmed  that  laipcnitency  and  loii.^elity  ,  thojgh  afterward 
Repented  of,  as  alfo  the  Imperfcdions  ot  :ruc  i'Mih  and  repen- 
tance, are  fins  againft  the  Genera!  j;>rcteptof  tl:t  Law  of  Na- 
ture,  and  the  fpecial  precept  of  the  Law  of  Grace,  and  that 
Chrilt  dyed  for  them,  and  th?y  are  pardoned  through  his  blood, 
upon  condition  of  fincere  Repentance  and  Fai.h. 

8.  Accordingly  diftinguifliing  between  the  rtfped  that  fin  hath 
to  the  precept  and  prohibition  on  one  fide ,  and  to  the  promifc 
and  thi  eatn.ng  on  the  other,  I  affirmed,  that  the  forefaid  Impe- 
nitency  and  Infidelity  that  are  afterwards  repented  of,  and  the 
Impertedions  of  true  Faith  and  Repentance  anc  condemned  by. 
the  Remediable  threatning  of  the  Law  of  Nature  only ,  and 
that  the  per  fon  is  not  under  the  Adual  obligation  of  the  pe- 
culiar Threatning  of  the  Law^of  Grace  ;  thar.is ,  that  though 
as  to  the  Gofpcl  Trecept ^ihek  fins  may  be  agf.inft  the  Gofpcl  as 
well  as  the  Law,  yet  as  to  the  Threatnng  ,  they  are  not  fuch 
violations  of  the  New  Covenant,  as  bring  men  undtr  irs  adual 
curfe  J  for  then  they  were  remedilef-t  And  therefore  I  faid,  that 
its  only  final!  mpenitencyahd  Unbelief,  as  final,  that  fofubjeSs 
men  to  that  Curfc  or  Remedilefs  pereraptory  fentence.    The 
reafon  is,  becaufe  the  Gofpe!  maketh  Repenting  and  Believing 
at  any  time  before  death,  the  Condition  ofpromifed  pardon: 
and  therefore  if  God  by  dtath  make  not  the  contrary  impeni- 
tency  and  unbelief  final ,  it  is  not  that  which  brings  a  man  un- 
der the  Rcroedilefs  Curfe  ;  (except  only  in  cafe  of  the  Blaf- 
phemy  againft  the  Holy  Ghoft,  which  is  ever  final.  ) 

9-  Accordingly  1  affirm  that  Chrift  never  bore,  or  intended 
to  bear  the  peculiar  Curfe  of  his  own  Law  of  Grace,  i.  As 
not  fuffering  for  any  mans  final  impcnitency  and  unbelief,wbich 
is  proved  in  his  Golpel  con-Titution  ,  which  giveth  out  pardon 
only  on  Gcndition  of  Faith  and  Repentance  :  and  therefore 
the  non- performance  of  his  Condition  is  exprefly  excepted  from 
all  pardon,  and  confcquendv  from  the  intended  fatisfadion, 
and  price  of  pardon,   z.  In  that,he  did  not  bear  that  fpecies  of 

puniflimcnr, 


(i4T) 


punifliraent,  as  peculiarly  appointed  by  the  Cofpel,  vU.  To  be 
denyed  Pardon,  Juftificacion  and  Adoption,  and  to  be  Remedi- 
lefs  in  mifery,  &c, 

lo.  Alfo  I  faid  ,  that  all  other  fins  are  pardonable  on  the 
Cofpel  Conditions  j  but  the  non- performance  ( that  is,  final ) 
of  thofe  Conditions  is  cvcrlaftingiy  unpardonable  (andcon- 
fequently  no  fin  pardoned  for  want  of  them. ) 

Reader,this  is  the  face  of  that  Doftrine  which  Reverend  Bre- 
thren vail  over  with  the  darknefs  and  confufion  of  thefc  Gene- 
ral words  ;  that  I  fay  ,  [  C^riji  hath  not  fatisHeti  far  fins  a^ainfi 
tht  fecond  Covtnant.'\  And  all  ihcfe  explications  I  am  fain  to 
trouble  the  world  with,  as  oft  as  they  are  pleafed  to  charge  mc 
in  that  confufion.  But  what  remedy  ?  This  is  the  Legion  of  CD* 
tours  and  contradiftions  •,  which  I  leave  to  thy  impartial  Judge* 
ment,  to  abhor  them  as  far  as  the  Word  and  Spirit  (liall  con- 
vince thee  that  they  are  erroneous,  and  to  blcfs  thofe  Congre- 
gations and  Countries  that  are  taught  to  abhor  them,and  to  re- 
joyce  in  their  felicity  that  believe  the  contrary. 

Treat,  pag.  2  55-  ».  If  fo ,  then  the  W<?r^/  of  the  Lay»  are 
Cortditions  of  our  fufiifcAtiort^  and  thus  he  runneth  into  the  eX" 
tream  he  ^onld avoid. 

Afif^.  I.  The  works  which  the  Law  rcquireth  to  Juftifica- 
tion,  that  is,  perfe^  obedience,  are  not  the  Conditions  of  Jufti- 
fication.  2.  Nor  the  fulfilling  of  the  Mofaical  Law  of  Sacri- 
fices, e^r.  3.  But  from  among  duties  in  general  required  by 
the  Moral  Law  ,  after  the  fpecial  Conftitution  of  the  Gofpel , 
God  hath  chofcnfome  to  be  the  Conditions  of  life.  And  if  you 
believe  not  this,  I  refer  you  to  Mr.  Blake^  who  will  undertake  to 
prove  more. 

2.  ButyouraflTertlonisgroundlefs.  I  faid  not  that  they  are 
works  of  the  Law.  What  if  the  Law  condemn  the  neglect  of 
a  Gofpel  duty  ?  Do  I  call  the  duty ,  a  work  of  the  Law,  be- 
caufcl  fay  the  Lawcondemncth  thencglcders  of  it  ? 

?.  But  are  you  indeed  of  the  contrary  opinion  ,  and  againft 
that  which  you  difpute  againft  ?  Do  }ou  think  that  the  Law 
doih  not  threaten  unbelievers ,  when  the  Gofpel  hath  com- 

U  Gunded 


(i4<5) 


manded  faith  ?  Have  I  fo  much  ado  to  perfwade  the  men  of 
your  party  ,  that  the  Gofpel  hath  any  peculiar  threatning  or 
penalty,  and  that  it  is  truly  a  Law  (  which  the  Luthtrans  have 
taught  too  many  )  and  nowdoyou  think  that  its  only  the  Go- 
fpel that  Curfeth  impenitent  unelieverj,and  that  maketh  punilh- 
mentduefor  rhc  remnant  of  tliefe  fins  in  penitent  Believers ?. 
Let  the  I|.cader  judge  who  runneth  into  extreams  and  feif  con- 
tradidion. 

Treat,  ib.  But  above  ally  that  u  net  to  bt  endured ,  that  Chrifl 
hath  itotfuffered  for  the  breaches  of  the  Nevo  Covenant ,  and  thit 
thi^e  ii  nojueh  breach  but  final  impenittncy  :  For  are  the  defers 
of  our  Repentance^  fUth  and  love  in  Chrtfi^  other  then,the  partial 
breaches  <>/  the  Covenant  of  Grace  ?  our  unthankfulnefsj  unfruit- 
fulnefs^  yeafometimes  With  Vettr^  our  grievous  revolts  andapojlo/m 
cles  ;  PPhat  are  thefe  but  the  fad  fjakjngs  of  our  (^ovenant-intt  refty 
though  they  donotdtffolveit  ?  But  it  is  not  my  purpofe  to  fall  on 
thfd^  becaufe  of  its  impertinency  to  my  matter  in  hand. 

Anfiv,  I  rather  thought  it  your  purpofe  to  fall  upon  it, 
though  you  confefs  it  impertinent  to  your  matter  in  hand.  For 
1  thought  you  had  purpofed  before  you  had  Trinted  or  Preachy 
id. 

Reader  ,  I  fuppofc  thee  one  that  hath  no  pleafure  in  dark- 
nefs ,  and  therefore  wouldft  fee  this  intolerable  errour  bare- 
faced.   To  which  end ,  befides  what  is  faid  before ,  underftand , 

1.  That  I  ufctodiftingullhbetweena  threefold  breach  of  the 
Covenant,  i .  A  fin  againft  a  mecr  prectpt  of  the  Gofpel,which.^ 
precept  may  be  Synecdochically  called  the  Covenant.  2.  A  fin 
againft  our  owwProwf/f  to  God  when  we  Covenant  with  him. 
3.  A  violation  of  Godsconflitution  ,  Q  Believe  and  be  fwed , 
and  he  that  believeth  not  JhaH be  damned  ^  making  us  the  proper 
fubjcdsof  its  AdlualCurfeor  Obligation  to  its  peculiar  pu- 
nifhment.  2,  On  thefe  diftindions  I  ufetofayas  followeth  ; 
J.  That  Chrift  fuflft-red  for  our  breaches  of  Gofpel  precepts. 

2.  And  for  our  breaches  of  many  promifes  of  our  own  to  God, 

3.  And  for  our  temporary  non-performance  of  the  Gofpel 
Cofldicions,;  which  left  usundcr  a  non-hberation  for  that  time, 

(and 


C  '47  ) 

(  and  therefore  we  had  no  freedom  from  fo  much  as  was  execu- 
ted. )  4.  But  not  for  (ucb  violation  of  the  New  Covenant, 
or  Law  of  Grace,  as  makes  us  the  actual  fub/ects  of  its  Curfe  or 
Obhgation  to  Remedilefs  punifhment.  Thefe  are  my  ufnal  limi- 
tations and  explications.  A  nd  do  I  need  to  fay  any  more  now 
in  defence  of  this  opinion,  which  my  Reverend  B  rothcr  faith  is 
not  to  be  endured  ?  i.  Is  it  a  clear  and  profitable  way  of  teach- 
ing to  confound  all  thefe,under  the  general  name  of  Covenant- 
breaking  ?  2.  Or  is  it  a  comfortable  Doctrine,  and  like  to  make 
Congregations  blefled ,  that  our  defects  of  repentance ,  un- 
fruitfulnefs,  and  unthankfulnefs,  &c.  are  fuch  violations  of  the 
Law  of  Grace ,  or  the  Conditions  of  the  Gofpel ,  as  bring  us 
under  its  actual  obligation  to  Remedilefs  punilhment  ?  That  is, 
in  plain  Hnglidi)  to  fay,  We  (hall  all  be  damned. 

Treat,  ib.  Argument  9.  ^f  ^orh  bt  a  condition  of  our  Jufii' 
fication^  then  mttft  the godlj  foul  be  filUd  ^ith  perpetual  doubts  ■, 
and  troubles t  whether  it  be  dperfonjuftifiedpr  no.  This  doth  not 
follow  Accidentally  through  mans  perverfnefs  from  the  fore^ndmed 
'Dc^rine  :  but  the  very  Genius^/  it  tends  thereunto.  For  if  4 
Condition  be  net  performed,  then  the  mercy  Covenanted  caunot  be 
claimed  :  At  in  faith ;  if  a  mtn  do  not  believe,  he  cannot  fay  y 
Chrifi  with  his  bent  fits  are  hi^.  Thus  if  he  have  not  warkj  ■>  the 
Condition  U  not  performed,  but  (lillhe  continueth  without  this  be- 
ntft.  Rut  for  ^orks  •,  How  (hall  J  know  when  I  have  the  full 
number  of  them  ?  fVhether  it  the  Condition  of  the  fpecies  or  indi- 
Viduums  of  works  ?  I  snot  onekiffdof  work^  omitted  ^ben  its  rt-j 
duty,  enough  to  invalidate  my  fujlification  ?  li'i/l  it  not  be  at 
dangerous  to  omit  that  one  as  all ^  feeing  that  one  is  required  At  a 

Condition  ? 

♦ 

Anfr,  Your  Argument  is  an  unproved  Affertion,  not  having 
any  thing  to  make  it  probable,  i  ■  Belief  in  Chrift  as  Lord  and 
Teacher,  is  ^cri^/ with  the  Opponents.  Why  may  not  a  man 
know  when  he  believeth  in  Chrift  as  King  and  Prophet ,  and  is 
his  Difciple,  as  well  as  when  he  believeth  in  him  as  Prieft  ? 

1.  Repentance  is  f^tfr/^/ alfo  with  the  Opponents.  Why  may 
not  a  man  know  when  he  Repenceth,  as  well  as  whc;n  he  belie- 
veth. U  2  3.  Do 


Ch8) 


3.  Do  you  not  give  up  the  Proteftant  caufc  here"  to  the  Pa- 
piftsin  the  point  of  certainty  of  falvation  ?  We  tell  them  that 
we  may  be  certain  that  our  faith  is  fincere.  And  how  ?  why  by 
its  fruits  and  concomitants ,  and  that  wc  take  Chrift  for  Lord 
as  well  as  Saviour,  or  to  fave  us  from  the  power  of  fin  as  well 
as  the  guilt  ?  And  is  it  now  come  to  that  pafs  that  thefcxannot 
be  known  ?  What  not  thefignsby  which  faith  it  felfltfbuld 
be  known,  and  therefore  (hould  btnotiora  ?  This  it  is  to  eye 
man  >  and  to  be  fee  upon  the  making  good  of  an  opini- 
on. 

4.  Let  all  Proteflants  anfwer  you,  and  I  have  anfwered  you. 
How  ^ili  thtj  knot*  when  they  Repent  and  Belteve;»hen  they  have 
ferjormed  the  full  of  thefe  ?  believed  all  jtecejfary  Truths  ?  /fr- 
fented  of  all  fins  that  muji  be  Repented  of  ?  fVhether  it  be  the  fpe- 
oi^i  or  individual  a^s  of  theft  that  are  necejfary  /  fVtll  not  the 
§miffion  of  Repentance  for  one  fin  invalidate  it  ?  Or  the  om'tjjion 
of  many  individual  alls  of  faith  i  are  not  thofe  ads  conditions} 
ice.  Anfwer  thefe,  and  you  are  anfwered. 

5.  But  I  (hall  anfwer  you  briefly  for  them  and  me.  Its  no 
impoflible  thing  to  know  when  a  man  fincerely  believeth,  re« 
penteth  and  obeyetb ,  though  many  Articles  are  ElTential  to 
the  AfTenting  part  of  faith,  and  many  finsjnuft  be  Repented  of, 
and  many  duties  mufl  be  done.  God  hath  made  known  to  us 
the  BfTentials  of  each.  It  ii  not  the  Degree  of  any  of  them  , 
but  the  Truth  that  is  the  Condition.  Afiian  that  bath  imperfect 
Repentance, Faith  and  Obedience  ,  may  know  when  they  arc 
fincere,  notwithftanding  the  imperfe6tions.  Do  you  not  believe 
this  ?  Will  you  not  maintain  it  againft  a  Papift  when  you  are 
returned  to  your  former  temper  P  what  need  any  more  then 
tobefaidof  it? 

6.  Yo.ur  Argument  makes  as  much  agiinft  the  making  ufe  of 
thefe  by  way  of  bare  figns,  as  by  way  of  Conditions,  For  an 
unknown  fign  is  no  fign  to  us. 

7.  And  how  could  you  over-look  it,  that  your  Argument 
flyeth  too  boldly  in  the  face  of  Chrift ,  and  many  a  plain  Text 
of  Scripture?  Chrift  faith,  John  15.10,  Jf  je  keep  my  Com- 
mandmentst  ye  fijall  abide  in  my  love  ,  even  at  I  have  kspf ,  &c. 
14.  Teare  my  friends  i  if  ye  do  what fotver  J  command  j  on  tM&t. 

7.2U 


7.  II.  Not  every  OMi  that  faith  Lord^  Lord^  Jhall  enter  into  the 
Kingdom  of  heaven^  but  he  that  doth  the  »iU  of  my  Father  which 
u  in  heaven,  23,24.  ff^ofoever  heareth  thefe  fajings  ofmine^ 
anci  doth  them.  Sec.  Mat.  5.  throughout,  verfc  20.  Except  your 
righteoufnefs  exceed  the  right  eoufnefs  of  the  Scribes)ind  Pharifees^ 
Jfe  Jhall  in  no  cafe  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  heaven,  i  John  3, 10. 
^n  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifefi  >  and  the  children  of  the 
Devil :  vfhofocver  doth  not  righteoufnefs  u  not  of  God ,  neither  he 
that  loveth  not  hu  br other. "^  An  hundred  fuch  paflages  might  be 
cited.  And  will  you  meet  all  thefe  with  your  objtdions,  and 
fay,  [  tlove  fhall  I  k»orP  ^hen  I  have  the  full  number  .'  &c.  ~] 
Know  that  you  hivefincere  Faith,  Repentance  and  Obedience, 
and  you  may  know  you  perform  that  Condition  of  the  Gofpcl : 
elfe  not. 

Treat,  pag.  236.  That  if  good  Works  be  a  Condition  of  fj^fli- 
fieation,  then  none  are  jujiifiid  till  their  death;  becanfe  in  every 
good  work.is  required  perfeverance^  info  much  that  perfeverance  u 
that  to  vthichthe  promife  is  made ,  Mat.  24.  6.  Heb.  10.  38. 
Rev.  2.  7, 20.  So  that  it  is  not  good  \\>orkjfimply  ,  but  per  fevered 
in  that  u  retfuired :  and  therefone  no  ^uflification  to  the  end  of  our 
daitSt  fo  that  we  cannot  have  any  peace  with  (jod  till  then.  Nd- 
thtr  doth  it  avail  to  fay,  Juflifcation  is  not  compleat  till  then  ;  for 
it  cannot  be  at  all  till  then^  btcaufe  the  (Condition  that  gives  life  to 
all  is  not  till  then. 

e^w/W,  I.  And  is  not  perfeverance  in  faith  as  neceflary  as 
perfeverance  in  obedience  ?  Read  ^ol.  1.23.  fohn  15,  ^,^,&c. 
and  many  the  like,  and  judge.  Will  you  thence  infer  that  none 
are  juftified  till  death  ? 

2.  But  a  little  rtep  out  of  the  darkncfs  of  your  Confufion  , 
will  bring  the  fallacy  of  your  Argument  to  the  light,  and  there 
will  need  no  more  to  it.  The  Gofpel  conveyeth  to  us  fcvcral 
benefits :  feme  without  any  Condition,  and  feveral  benefits  on 
(c  eral  Conditions,  i .  Our  firft  Adual  pardon  and  Juftificati- 
on,  and  right  to  life,  is  given  on  Condition  of  our  firft  Faith  and 
Repentance  :  and  not  on  Condition  of  External  works  of  Obe- 
dience, nor  yet  of  pcrfevering  in  faith  it  fclf,  much  iefs  in  thac 

U  3  Obedienct. 


I 


Obedience.  2.  Oar  (late  of  Juftificatlon  is  continued  on  con-' 
ditioncf  the  continuance  of  Faich  and  Rcpemance,  with  fin- 
cere  Obed;ence.  3.  Our  particular  following  fins  have  a  par- 
ticular pardon,  on  Condition  of  the  Continuance  of  the  habits 
and  renewing  of  the  aft$  of  that  faich  and  repentance,  for 
known  obferved  fins.  4.  Our  full  Juftification  by  Sentence  at 
Judgement,  is  on  the  fame  condition  as  Glorification,  vi<.. 
On  perfeverance  in  Faith,  Repentance,  Hope,  Love  and  fincerc 
Obedience. 

Prove  now  if  you  can  that  perfeverance  is  the  Condition  of 
our  firft  pardon.  Prove  if  you  can  that  final  perfeverance  is  the 
Condition  of  our  continuance  in  a  juftirted  ftate  till  now.  You 
fay,  J  unification  and  peace  cannot  be  ours  till  the  condition  be 
performed.  But  what  condition  ?  of  that  gift  ?  or  of  another 
gift?  If  of  that,  its  granted  ;  but  its  ftill  denyed  that  perfeve- 
rance is  any  of  the  Condition  of  our  firft  pardon  ?  If  of  ano- 
ther gift ;  its  no  reafon  of  your  Confequence.  I f  you  fpeak  of 
final  Juftification  and  Salvation,  I  grant  you  all  thus  far,  that 
you  have  no  full  Right  of  polTeffing  them  but  on  perfeverance ; 
nor  no  Right  at  all,  or  certainty  of  Salvation ,  but  on  fuppo- 
fition  of  perfeverance  as  neceffary  to  the  pofTeflion.  And  there- 
fore if  you  can  prove  that  we  have  no  certainty  of  perfeverance, 
1  will  yield  chat  we  have  no  certainty  of  falvation. 

Treat.  Thus  Vre  hdve  ajferted  this  truth  hj  many  ArgU" 
Mints  ;  and  though  any  one  finglj  hj  it  [elf  may  not  convince  , 
jet  altogether  »M}Jatijfie  — ■*  NoVp  to  the  great  OhjeSlt- 

'  em 

Anf».  I  heartily  wifti  that  wifer  Readers  may  find  more  truth 
and  fatisfa(Sion  in  them'then  lean  do,  if  it  be  there  to  be  found  ; 
and  CO  chat  end  that  they  make  their  beft  of  them  all. 

Treat.  James /^«r/5>,  Abraham  was  jttfttfied  hy  W(?;'j^/— — '• 
[0  that  in  outward  appearances  thefe  two  great  ApoJIl^i  fpeak^  cor.' 
tradiclionf^  which  hath  made  feme  deny  the  Canonical  author  ttyi)f 
Id^mtis  Efiftle.  Tea  one /aid  iflafphemeujly,  AkhAme'ivius,  Men- 
ciris  Jacobe  in  caput  iuum.Bftt  this  ia to  crtt,not  nmic  the  hot. — 

i.Tht 


I.  Tht  fcope  of  the  Apoflle  Paul  u  to  treat  upon  our  fuflificatton 
before  God ,  and  what  u  tht  Inftrument  and  means  of  obtaininf^ 
it' —  'Bfit  the  Apoftle  JKinti  takes  f  unification  for  tht  "Declara- 
tion and  Maniftfiation  of  it  before  men, 

Anf"^,  This  is  not  the  only  fenfc  of  James  (  as  I  have  proved 
before,  to  which  I  refer  you  )  no  oor  any  pare  of  the  fenfe  of 
the  word  fufiification  with  him ,  chough  he  mention  fie^ing 
faith  by  works  to  men^  as  an  argument  for  his  main  conduHon , 
yec  he  nowhere  expoundeth  the  word  JuftiHcation  by  ic.  fames 
expreOy  fpeaks  of  Imputation  of  Righceoufnefs  by  God,  and  of 
that  Juftification  which  is  meant  in  the  words  of  Qen.  concern- 
ing Abraham^  even  the  fame  words  that  F<iif/ expoundeth  •  and 
of  that  Juftification  which  inferreth  falvation. 

Treat.  Viulinformethus  that  faith  only  jujiifieth,  and  Jtimcs, 
what  k'»d  of  faith  it  u^  even  a  lively  working  faith, 

Anfw.  I  have  anfwercd  this  in  the  beginning  of  this  Difpu- 
tation. 

Treat.  ItsfaiJ,  They  hare  not  go  againfl  the  f lain  words  (^ 
the  Afojile.  But  its  not  the'^h^'i'  but  ^'««V'et,  not  the  words , 
but  the  fenfe 

f^nfvp.  OurQueftionis,  How  the  fenfe  of  J^w^j  fliallbe 
known?  Will  you  fay,  not  by  the  words,  but  by  the  fenfe?  The 
words  arc  to  exprefs  the  fenfe  •,  and  we  muft  take  heed  of  forcing 
them  as  much  as  we  can.  As  to  your  faying  or  the  Anthrono- 
morphites,  and  Hoc  t^ corpus  meum-^  I  anfwer  •,  the  Tropical 
fenfc  is  oft  the  plaineft  j  and  in  particular  in  thefe  inftanccs.  If 
any  man  point  to  feveral  pidures,  and  fay.  This  is  Crf/d'",and 
this  is  Pf-w/Jf;,  &c.  Ifhallbyufe  of  fpeech  (the  interpreter  of 
words  )  take  the  tropical  fenfe  to  be  chc  plaineft ,  and  noc  the 
literal ;  viz.  That  this  is  C*/^ri Image,  and  noc  that  ic  is  his 
perfon.  And  fo  here. 

2.  Give  me  any  cogent  Evidence  that  I  muit  leave  the  plain 
fenfei  and  I  am  fatislied, 

3,Rememb53r 


I 


3.  Remember  I  pray  you,  that  its  not  the  words,  but  the 
fenfe  that  you  except  againft.  Do  not  you  except  hereafccr 
againft  the  faying  that  (  we  are  Juftified  by  works,  and  not  by 
faith  only  ^  as  Jumts  doth;  but  againft  the  ill  fcnfe  that  you 
can  prove  to  be  put  upon  the  words. 

Treat,  p^g.  238.  Laflly  ,  They  art  forced  to  add  to  the 
j^pofilt',  for  they  fay-,  ^orkj  jujiifie  as  the  Condition  of  tht 
G  of  pelf  which  the  Afojile  doth  notfpeal^afVord  of. 

Anfw,  I .  We  fay  not  that  Jams  calls  them  a  condition;there- 
fore  we  add  not  to  him  asbif. 

a.  Every  Expolition  and  application  is  an  addition  of  ano- 
ther fore,  but  not  as  of  the  fame. 

3.  lufenotthe  adive  phrafe  that  fftjyj^fjfif/?;^^,  agreeing fo 
far  with  you  -,  who  note  a  difference  between  thele  fayings, 
laith  jttftifietb,  zndm  are  jnfitficdhy  faith:  for  all  that  Mr. 
BUk^e  defpifctb  the  obfervation,  which  perhaps  he  would 
fcarce  have  donei  if  he  had  known  that  you  bad  being  guilty  of 
it  aifo. 

4.  Scripture  fuppofeth  Grammer,  Logick,  Phyficks,  &c.  and 
no  more  is  to  be  expeded  from  it  but  its  own  part.  If  James  tell 
you  that  we  are  jui^ificd  by  works,  he  doth  not  fay  that  J>k^k7iu 

"•.  is  a  verb,  and  i^ynv  is  a  noun,  and  fo  of  the  reft  j  bnt  he  war- 
ranteth  you  to  fay  fo  without  any  unjuft  addition  fuppoHng  that 
Grammer  fo   call  them ;  If  the  Scripture  fay,  that  God  erf 
Med  the  Heavens  and  the  earthen  doth  not  fay  here  in  terms,  that 
God  was  the  efficient  caufe  :   but  it  warranteth  you  to  fay  fo  .- 
If  it  fay,  that  Chrift  dyed  for  us,  and  was  a  Sacrifice  for  our 
iins,  and  hath  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us ;  yet  it  faith 
not  that  he  is  the  meritorious  caufe,  or  the  material  caufe  of 
our  Juftification ;  But  it  will  warrant  you  to  fay  fo,  without  the 
guilt  of  unjuft  additions.     If  you  may  fay  as  a  Grammarian 
and  aLogiiian,,    when  you  meet  with  fuch  words  in  Scripture, 
\_  Thefe  arc  Paronyma ,  and  thefe    Synohyma ,    and  thefe 
Homonyma,  and  this  is  an  univerfal,  that  a  lingular,    that  a 
particular,  and  that  an  indefinite ;  this  is  an  efficient  caufe^that  a 
material,  formal  or  final  •  this  is  a  noun,  that  a  verb,the  other  a 

participle 


(ijO 


participle  or  an  adverb  ;  I  pray  you  then  why  may  not  I  fay, 
when  I  read  in  Rom,  lo. 9. th^\.[_lf  than  cor.ftfs  Vaththy  momh^ani 
hlieve  in  th)  heart,  Sec.  ]  that  [  //J  is  a  conjundion  con- 
ditional? Is  this  adding  to  the  Scripture  unjuftly  ?  If  j  did, 
when  ever  I  read  that  we  arc  jurtiHed^7  faith,  colled  thence 
that  faichisanlnftrumcntal  caufc,  as  if />;  were  only  the  note 
of  an  Inftrument,  then  you  might  have  accufcd  me  of  unwarran- 
table addition,  or  colleflions, indeed, 

Laftly,  If  you  have  a  mind  to  it,  I  am  content  that  you  lay 
by  the  unfcriptural  names  (or  additions  as  you  fpeak  )  of  nouns, 
pronouns,  verbs,  antecedents,  conkquents,  eiHcienc.or  mate- 
rial caufes,  c^t,  and  I  will  Ity  by  the  name  of  a  condition,  m 
you  do  of  an  Inftrument-  and  we  will  onlyufc  the  Scripture 
phrafe,  which  is,  If  jom  forgivt  men,  your  Fathtr  ^UI  forgivi 
yoH  j  if  xtt  eonftfs  onr  Jint,  he  it  faitbftiU  andjkfi  to  forgive  : 
we  art  jujlifiedhj  faith  ^ithoptt  the  workj  of  the  Law :  A  man  it 
juftifiedhy  yoorkj  dndnot  by  faith  only  :  By  thj^ords  then /halt  be 
jafiified.  Every  min  Jhall  be  jndged  according  to  his  worl^Sy  ] 
ac.Let  us  keep  to  Scripture  phrafe  if  you  defire  it,and  you  (hall 
find  me  as  backward  as  any  to  lay  much  firefi  upon  terms  of 
Arc. 

Having  gone  thus  far,  I  (hall  in  brief  give  you  a  truer  re- 
conciliation of  Taul  and  fAmes  then  you  here  offer  us.  i. 
They  debate  different  quettions,  2.  And  that  with  different 
forts  of  perfons.  3.  And  fpeak  diredly  of  different  forts  of 
works.  4.  And  fomcvyhac  differ  in  the  fenfe  of  the  word  Faith. 
5.  And  fomwhat  about  the  wordjuftification.  6.  And  they 
fpeak  of  works  iu  fevcral  Relations  to  Juftification. 

I.  TheQucftion  that  ?ahI  difputed  was  principally  Whc- 
|J|her  Juftificarion  be  by  the  works  of  the  A'fofa'calL^^,  and 
cmifequenrly  by  any  mercenary  works ,  without  Chrift,  or  in 
Co-ordination  with  Chrift  ,  or  any  way  at  all  conjunft 
with  Chrift  ?  The  queftion  that  J  tmes  difputed  ,  was,  Whe- 
ifier  men  are  juftified  by  meer  believing  without  Gofpcl-Obedi- 
rnce  > 

2.     The  perfons  that  F4«/ difputed  againft,  were,    i    The 
unbelieving  ffW;,   that  thought  the  (JMofnical  Law  was  of 

X  fuch 


inch  perfcftion  to  rfie  making  of  men  righteous,  ih%t  there 
needed  no  other  ,  much  lefs  {hould  it  be  abrof^ite.  V^  here 
fpccially  note,  tha:  the  righceoufneU  which  the  fr.'rs  expected 
by  that  Law,was  not  (as  is  commonly  icnagined)  a  righteoufnefs 
of  finlefs  obedience,  fuch  as  was  required  of  /^ditm ;  but  a  mixtt 
Righteoufnefs ,  confifting  of  accurate  Obedience  to  the 
Mofa'tcAl  taw  in  the  main  courfc  of  their  Uves,and  exaiS  facri- 
ficing  according  to  thacLaw  for  the  pardon  of  their  fins  com- 
mitted, (  wherein  they  made  exprefsconfelfion  of  fin  j  fo  that 
thefe  two  they  though:  fufficient  to  juftifie,  and  lookt  for  the 
A^eJJioi  but  to  frve  them  from  captivity,  and  repair  their  Tem- 
ple, Law,  e^<:.  And  2.  Prf^A  difpiKed  againft  fahe  Teachers, 
that  wx)Uld  bare- jq^/ned  thefe  two  together  ( the  Righteouf- 
nefs of  Mofes  L^W,a*nd  Faith  inChrift  )  a^neccflary  to  life. 

But  p;jwf/ difputed  againft  falfe  Ghriftians,  that  thought  il 
enough  to  falvaiion  barely  to  believe  in  Chrift,  (or  lived  as  if 
they  fo  thought)  its  fike  mifunderftanding  F^«/i  Dodrinc  of 
]u!;i(icati6n  as  mitiy  now  Aq. 

3.  The  works  .th^t-  Pw«7  fpcaks  of  direftly,  ace  the  fcrvice* 
appointed  by  Mo^ts  Liw  ftippofed  to  be  fufficient,  becaufe  o£ 
the  fuppofed  fufficiency  of  that  Law.  So  that  its  all  one  with 
him  to  be  juUfied  by  the  Law,  and  to  be  juftified  by  works -, 
and  therefore  he  ofter  fpeaksagainft  Juftification  by  the  Law 
expre{ly,andufuallyftilech  the  works  he  fpeaks  of,  the  works 
of  the  Law.yet;  by  cOnfequcncc,  and  a  parity  of  Reafon,he  may 
well  befaidto^fpeakagainft  any  works  imaginable  that  are  fee 
in  oppofition  to  Chiift,  or  competition  with  him,  and  that 
are  fuppofed  meritorious  ,    and    intended    as    Mercenary. 

But  J  Ames  fpeaks  of  no  works  ,  bat  Obedience  to. 
Cod  in  Chrift,  and  that  asftanding  indue  fubordmation  to 
Chrift.  •  •    i  •■•  -i 

4.  By  faith  in  the  DoArine  of  Juftification,P<i«/  means  one 
Aflentto  all  the  efTential  Articles  of  the  Gofpel,  together  wittt' 
our  Acceptance  of  J  fus  Chrift  rlie  Lord,  as  fuch,  and  affi'. 
anceinhim  ^  that  is,  To  be  a  believer  ,  and  fo  to  have  faith> 
is  wiih  Pw«/,  to  bea  DifcipIeofChrift,  oraChriftan:  Though 
fomttime  he  fpecially  denominates  ihaq  faith  from  one  part  of 

the 


the  objed  (  the  protnlfc  )  fomctime  from  another  '  the  blood 
ef  Chrift  )  fometime  from  a  third  (  his  obedience.  )  And  in 
other  cafes  he  diftinguiftieth  Faith  from  Hope  and  Charity.buc 
not  in  the  bufinefsof  Juftification,  confidering  them  asrcfpc- 
ding  Chrift  an4  the  ends  of  his  blood. 

But  fames  by  faith  means  a  bare  InefTedual  Aitent  to  the 
Truth  of  the  Chriftian  Religion ,  fnch  as  the  Devils  thcm- 
felveshad- 

5.  P*iul  fpeaks  of  Juftification  in  its  whole  ftate,  as  begun 
and  continued.  But  }ames  doth  principally,  if  not  only 
fpeak  of  Juftification  as  continued.  Though  if  by  works  any 
undtrftand  a  difpoiition  to  work  in  faith,  or  conjunA  with  It 
(as  Dr.  lickfen^o\h)  fobis  words  arc  true  of  initial  juftifica- 
tion al  fo. 

6.  The  principal  difference  lyeth  in  the  Relations  of  works 
mentioned.  Paul  fpeaks  of  works  as  the  immediate  matter 
of  %  legal  perfonal  Righcroufnefs,  in  part  or  whole.  Bilt 
fAntrs  Ipoak  of  Works,  not  as  anfwering  the  Law,  but  as 
fulfilling  the  condition  of  the  Gofpel ,  and  implyed  (  as  promi- 
fedor  refolvedonj  in  our  firft  believing,  and  fo  as  fubfcrvicnt 
to  the  Sacrifice,  Merit  and  Righteoufnefs  of  Chrifl ,  as  the 
avoiding  of  poifon  or  dangerous  meats  (  that  may  kiIl,thou^h 
the  conrtary  cannot  cure  )  is  fubfervient  to  the  curing  mcdjcine 
of  a  Phyftcian,  and  implyed  in  our  taking  him  for  our  Phy  Ocfan 
at  firft. 

And  fo  much  briefly  to  fatisfie  you  and  the  world,  of  rtic 
Reafonsof  my  Diffent  from  you,  that  I  may  not  differ  from 
fo  Dear  and  Reverend  a  Brother,  without  making  it  appear, 
that  necelTicy  did  compel  me. 

That  which  I  have  paffedov^r,  being  about  the  Inftrumen- 
tality  of  Faith,  1  (hall  fpeak  to,  (  if  Ood  will )  together  with 
^r.  Blakes  Reafonings  on  thaf  Subjeft,  in  another  Difputation. 


X  2  O;. 


Avingheardthat  Mr. 
diflik^d  fome  things  in  my  A^ 
phortjm standby  the  perjlva/t-- 
ons  of  fome, intended  a  (Confu- 
tation of  them  :  I  wrote  to  him  dn  ear^ 
ncfl  ^^quejl^  that  he  would  acquaintme 
with  what  he  diflil{ed  ,  annexing  his 
^J^c^fons  to  convince  me  of  my  Errors^  pro- 
fefsing  my  carne/l  'De/tre  of  Information^ 
efpeaa/lj  from  him  :  T'o  which  he  re^ 
flyed,  as  followeth^ . 


Dear 


aAaaaa&A&aAAAAAaaaAA  AAAAAAAA 

TejiY  Sir. 

Have  indeed  declared  to  fome,  who  happily 
may  have  informed  you  of  it,  as  I  defired* 
thac  there  were  fcvcral  Dodrinal  points 
aflerted  in  your  Book,  to  which  I  could  not 
fedtbwire,  much  lefs  cordi  ;  fuch  are  many 
pofitiors  about  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs,  aboQC 
faiths  Juftification  in  your  fenfe,  and  the  Efficacy  of  new  Obe- 
dience in  this  work  as  well  as  faith.  Yea  Love  made  fome  kind  of 
the  aflings  of  Faith  :  The  good  old  found  definition  of  Faith 
waved,  and  a  new  one  fubftituted.  Not  the  -n^ereAtrt^  but  the 
'^  operari  alfo  called  into  Evangelical  Righteoufnefs,  and  this 
made  our  pcrfonal  Righteoufnefs.  Thefe  things  and  divers 
others  do  make  me  vehemently  diffent  from  you  in  the  matters 
afferted.  Yet  I  do  really  honour  you,  for  your  great  Abilities 
and  zealous  Piety ,earneftly  defiring  of  God  that  he  would  pro- 
long your  life,  and  have  mercy  upon  hss  Church  by  fparing  this 
£paphrodituf. 

But  whereas  you  have  been  told,  that  I  had  aniraadverfions  on 
your  Book,  thiiwasamiftake :  for  the  truth  is,  though  I  have 
caft  my  thoughts  upon  fome  part  of  it,  yet  I  have  not  anydi- 
gefted  or  prepared  confiderations  about  it:  but  do  defer  fuch 
a  work,  till  Ifiiail  have  opportunity  to  difchargc  that  part  I 
have  publiquely  promifed  about  imputed  Righteoufnefs ;  which 
Subj'ed  1  cannot  \et  profecute,  being  hindred  by  other  avoca- 
tions :  It  is  true,  I  have  had  advertfement  from  fome  honour- 
ed friends  of  m'mc  zt  London,  that  it  is  expefted,  I  rtiould  do 
fomethingin  thofe  points,  becaufe  by  your  [nfcription  of  my 
name  f  which  I  take  as  an  Ad  of  your  real  Love  and  refpcft 
to  mC;  though  I  ara  unworthy  of  any  fuch  Tcftimony  )  they 

think 


Ci6i) 


think  I  am  inrcrcfted.  Had  I  known  the  Contents  of  the  book 
before  publiflied,  I  would  have  inoft  importunately  urged  you 
at  leaft  to  have  taken  more  time  of  deliberation  about  the 
divulgation  of  them  ,  which  you  know  have  much  novelty 
in  them.  I  know  things  are  not  to  be  embraced  or  rcjedled, 
becaufc  either  old  or  new  ;  yet  Tattl  doth  diflike  ^(j^vo^uyUf  ^ 
if  we  may  fo  read  it ,  and  not  Mvozwia.?.  I  fhajl  con- 
clude with  this  :  Let  not  any  difference  from  you  in 
Judgement  be  any  obft^udion  to  improve  your  utmoft  Abilities 
(  which  arc  many  and  lovely  )  to  the  finding  out,  and  propa- 
gating of  Truth.  Jf  God  prolong  your  life,  I  hope  this  next 
Summer  we  may  have  mutual  oral  Conference  together,  which 
is  the  moft  conducible  way  to  clear  both  Truth  and  our  Opi- 
nions. 


Tour  fjithfnll  Friend  and  Brothtr 


Decemb.  3^ 


To  the  Rtvtrend ,  and  hi^  much  Honoured  Friend ,  L^r, 
Baxter,  Preacher  of  the  H'ord  of  qod  at  Kederminfterj  theft 
^Deliver' 


1  Received  yours ,  which  I  acknowledge  a  Favour  .-  but 
notfogreat  asl  expeft.  Your  diflent  is  fo  generally  known, 
thatlcannet  buthope  to  know  fome  of  the  Grounds  of  it.  I 
hope  you  cannot  fo  vehemently  diffent  in  points  of  fuch  Mo- 
ment, and  vet  deny  me  a  difcovery  of  mine  Error.  The  defer- 
ing  of  fuck  a  work  till  you  have  wrote  another  Book,  doth 
intimate  what  will  be  injurious  to  the  Church  ,  your  felf 

y  and 


(1^1) 


and  rtie  :  If  you  intend  to  publilh  a  Confutation ,  when  I 
am  dead,  and  deny  me  any  help  for  convidion  while  I  live. 
I. The  Church  will  lofc  the  fruit  of  my  own  Recantation. 2. And 
your  felf,  one  part  of  the  fruit  of  your  Labor.  3 .  And  I  may  dye 
in  error  unrecinted,  and  you  (  b  ing  nuw  importuned  for  your 
he!p  )  be  guilty  of  it.  If  you  did  but  know  how  gladly  I  would 
publiquely  recant,  you  would  not  deny  your  help.  You  that 
would  havefo  importuned  me  to  deliberatCjif  you  had  known 
before,  I  hope  will  not  deny  your  ailiftance  for  my  recovery. 
I  did  not  hahily  that  1  did.  But  though  1  wanted  the  oppor- 
tunity of  confulting  you  before,  yetl  hope  itisnot  too  late.  I 
am  confident  if  you  kiow  rae,you  are  not  fo  uncharitable  as  ro 
think  me  uncurable.  Ic  is  therefore  your  flat  duty  rot  to  fuffer 
fin  upon  me.  Let  me  therefore  intreat  you  to  fend  me  one 
or  two  of  your  ftron^efl  Arguments  againfl  fome  of  the 
weightyefl  points  in  difference;  and  to  anfwcrmine.  I  know 
it  is  not  an  hours  work  with  you  to  do  that  much  ;  and  I  would 
beftow  twenty  for  you.  If  you  fufped  that  I  will  any  way 
mif-imploy  your  papers,  you  Aall  prcfcribe  me  the  Law  therein 
your  felf.  Whether  you  will  read  jceso^wU?  or  K.^vc!p:vi'icti^ 
I  am  indifferent,  being  no  friend  to  either.  I  thought  it  a 
greater  novelty  to  fay,  Faith  jufilfieth  enlvor  frimarilj  as  an 
Jnftrumenti  then  to  h^,  \X.  ju^tfieth  as  the  (^on^itiont  which  the 
free  LaWfgiver  h'itbpromifedfft/lificatioyj  upon.  I  knew  it  was 
no  novelty  to  fay,  we  rauft  have  a  perfonal  Righteoufnefs  be- 
fides  that  imputed  :  And  I  took  it  to  be  as  old  as  the  Gofpel, 
to  fay,  that  this  confifleth  in  Faith  and  finccre  Obedience.  I 
called  it  Evangelical,  becaufe  I  trembled  to  think  of  having  aa 
inherent  Righteoufnefs  which  the  Law  of  work;  will  fo  deno- 
minate. What  you  fay  of  the  []  Efficacy  of  Obedierce  and 
Faith  ]  I  difclaim  both,  as  never  coming  into  my  thoughts; 
I  acknowledge  no  efficieKcj  as  to  JtijiifiCAtion  in  either,bur  a  bare 
coMditiomlity,  I  aver  confidently  that  I  give  no  more  to 
works,  then  our  Divines  ordinarily  do,  viz.  to  be  a  fecondary 
part  of  the  ConMtioK  of  the  neif  Covenitnt^  a-tJ  fo  of  J^f/fijica- 
tion^as  continued andconfftmmate,  and  of  Qlorifi'^at;o-'i :  only  if 
I  err,  it  is  in  giving  lefs  to  Faith,  denying  it  to  be  the  bijlrumen- 
tal  Cmfe  of  Jujlification^  but  only  acondiLion.  My  Defini- 
tion 


tion  of  Faith  is  the  fame  (  in  kn(e)  with  Dr.  PrtfionSt  Mr. 
Cnhe-'  well,  Mr.  Throgmorton  ,  Mr.  Norton  of  new  EKglnnd 
\n  his  Catechifm,  &c.  O  how  it  grieveth  me  to  diflent  from 
my  Reverend  Brethren !  Some  report  it  to  be  a  pernitious 
Book:  others  overvalue  it,  and  fo  may  receive  the  more  hurt 
if  it  be  unfound.  Truly  Sir  I  am  little  prejudiced  againft 
your  Arguments  ^  But  had  rather  return  into  the  common 
road  then  not,  if  I  could  fee  the  Light  of  truth  to  guide  me.  I 
abhor  affected  Angularity  inDoArine:  therefore  1  intreat  you 
again  to  defer  no  longer  to  vouchfafe  me  the  fruit  of  one  hours 
labour,  which  I  think  I  may  claim  from  your  Charity  and  the 
Intereft  God  hath  given  one  member  in  another,  and  you  (hall 
hereby  very  much  oblige  to  thankfulnefs 

Jm.  11.       1649. 

Tour  unWorthj  fellow '[ervarit 

Richard  Baxter. 


To  my  %jvtrencl  and  very  much  vulaed  friend')  Mr,    . 

i'      'Preacher  of  Gods  fVord  at ' ■' 

§  Thefe  prefent. 


Dear  Sir^ 

I  Received  your  Letter,  and  I  returned  fome  Anfwer  by  Mr. 
Brya>i,  viz..  that  now  the  daies  growing  longer  and  warmer, 
I  (hall  be  glad  to  take  occafion  to  confer  with  you  mouth  to 
mouth  about  thofe  things  wherein  we  differ ;  for  I  conceive  that 
to  be  a  far  more  compendious  way,  then  by  letters, wherein  any 
midake  is  not  fo  eafily  reftified  .•  I  fiiall  therefore  be  ready  to 
give  you  the  meeting  at  Bremicham  any  Thurfday  you  (hall 
appoint  that  may  be  convenient  with  your  health  ^  that  fo  by 
an  amicable  collation,  we  may  find  out  the  truth.    In  the  mean 

Y  2  while 


(i<J4-) 


while  I  fliall  not  wholly  negleA  your  rcqueft  in  your  letter,  bat 
give  you  an  hint  at  one  of  thofe  feveral  Arguments  that  move 
incto  di/Tenc  from  you ;  which  although  it  be  obvious,  yet  fach 
Arguments  as  moft  men  pitch  upon,  have  thegreateft  ftrength  : 
and  that  is  the  peculiar  and  proper  expre(Tions  the  Scripcurc 
giveth  to  faith  in  the  matter  of  Juftification,  and  that  when 
the  Doctrine  is  purpofely  handled,  asP<««/in  his  Epiftle  to  the 
Romans ,  attributing  it  fo  to  faith,  as  it  excludes  not  the  prc- 
fence,  but  the  co-operation  of  any  other.  He  doth  fo  include 
faith,  as  that  he  doth  exclude  all  works  under  any  notion ;  foe 
Abraham  VIM  then  jgodly,  and  abounded  in  other  Graces,  ycE 
the  Apoftle  faftens  his  Juftification  upon  this  .-  in  fo  much 
that  if  a  man  would  have  dcfiredthe  Apoftle  to  make  a  diffe- 
rence between  faith  and  other  Graces,  it  could  not  have  been 
done  more  evidently.  As  for  the  Apoftle /««»«,  your  fence 
cannot  be  admitted  to  reconcile  them  ,  but  rather  makes 
that  breach  wider .-  the  one  faith,a  Juftification  without  works  ; 
you  make  Faith  as  well  as  works,though  one  primarily  :  where- 
as the  Orthodox  both  againft  Papijis  and  Arminiansj  and  Soci» 
»»4»/,dofweetly  reconcile  them.  By  the  hint  of  this,  I  fee 
a  Letter  cannot  reprefent  the  vigor  of  an  Argument.  I  (hall 
only  add  one  thing:  we  may  hold  Opinions*  anddifpute  them 
fpeculatively  in  Books  j  but  pradically,  and  when  we  come  to 
dye,  we  dare  not  roakeufe  of  them.  I  know  not  how  a  godly 
man  at  his  death  can  look  upon  his  Graces  as  Conditions  of  the 
Covenant  fulfilled  by  him ;  though  the  Grace  of  God  and  the 
Merits  of  Chrift  be  acknowledged  the  procuring  caufe.  The 
Papift»  alfo  verbally  come  to  that  refiige  :  For  now  come  the 
Imperfedions  in  the  Conditions  to  be  pardoned,  and  condition 
have  a  moral  Efficiency  ?  Raftim*  But  of  thefe  things  more 
fnlly  when  I  fee  you. 

The  Lord  preferve  you  an  Inftrumcnt  in  his  Church,  and  ii^ 
red  and  faxidifie  all  your  parts  and  abilities  for  his  Glory. 


Feb.    1 3 .  Tour  Uving  "Brother  in  the  Lord 


To  hit  very  loving  and  much  reffeEltd  Friend  Jllr,  Baxter, 
^Unifier  of  gods  yyord  at  Kederrainftcr,  thefe  be  dtUvered. 

Sirl 


065) 


S/r, 

F  Or  the  cxpreifions  of  your  love  in  your  two  Letters,  and 
your  offer  to  meet  me  for  conference  j  I  recurn  you  hearty 
thanks.  But  I  told  you  of  my  weaknefs,  which  is  fo  greacthac 
I  am  not  able  to  travd,nor  to  difcourfe  to  any  purpofe  if  I  were 
with  you  :  a  few  words  do  fo  fpend  me  (  except  when  I  have 
alictleeafe,  which  fals  out  perhaps  once  in  amoncthfora  few 
hours  unexpedled )  therefore  I  am  refolved  to  importune  you 
once  again,  and  if  you  now  deny  me,  to  ceafe  my  fuit.  It  is 
expedcd  at  London^  (^amlfridge^&c.  that  you  write  a  confutati- 
on,and  you  intimate  your  purpofe  to  do  fo  hereafter:  which  I  will 
not  difTwade  you  from,  fo  I  might  but  fee  your  Argumcnts,thac 
before  I  dye,  I  might  know  whether  I  have  erred,  and  not  dye 
without  repenting  or  recanting ;  and  if  I  err  not ,  that  I  might 
(hew  you  my  grounds  more  fully  ^  And  if  you  deny  this  rcqueft 
to  one  that  hath  fo  even  unmannerly  importuned  you,  and  ycc 
purpofe  to  do  it,  when  I  can  neither  be  the  better  for  it,  nor 
defend  my  felf,  you  walk  not  by  that  Rule  as  I  thought  you 
did,  nor  do  as  you  would  be  done  by.  But  for  my  part,  I  have 
done  my  endeavour  for  information,  and  fo  have  fatisfied  my 
ownconfcience.  For  what  (bould  I  do  ?  There  is  none  in  this 
Country  that  will  attempt  a  convincing  of  me,  by  word  or 
writing ,  nor  for  ought  I  hear ,  gainfay  :  and  you  are  the 
neareft  from  whom  I  may  hope  for  it.  In  your  laft  you 

overpafs«ll  the  particulars  almoft  touched  in  your  former,  and 
pitch  on  Juftification  by  works.  Where  you  mention  Pauls 
attributing  it  to  Faith,  to  which  I  have  anfwered ,  and  have  no 
Reply.  I.  Where  you  fay  Prf«/ excludes  the  Co-operation  of  any 
other ;  I  anfwer,  So  do  I.  And  of  Faith  too  I  deny  the  ope- 
rations as  cflfedive.  2.  When  you  fay,  he  excludes  works  undet 
any  notion,  I  anfwer.  i.  Would  I  could  fee  that  proved. 
2.  Then  how  can /4«f;  fay  true  ?3.Then  he  excludes  faith  un- 
der  the  notion  of  an  Inftruraent.     4.    And  Repentance  under 

Y    3  the 


C  i^^) 


the  notion  of  a  preparative,  or  condition.  5.  But  if  you  mean 
only  that  he  excludes  the  cG-operation,  or  efficiency  of  works, 
I  yield  as  before.     6.  P.wl  exprefly  excludes  only  the  works 
of  the  law,  that  is,  fuch  as  are  confidcred  in  oppoficionto 
Chrift^  or  coordinKion  as  required  by  the  Law  of  Works, 
and  not  fuch  as  Chrift  himfelt  enjoynech  in  fubordination  to 
himfeif,    fo  they  keep  that  place  ot  fubordination.    j^  Pauls 
Queition  is,  What  is  the  llighceoufnefi  which  muft  denominate 
a  finner  juftat  the  Bar  of  the  Law  ?  And  this  he  faith  is  no 
Works(under  any  norio;i,'no  not  Faitn,huc  only  Chrifls  Righ- 
teoufnefs,  and  fo  faith  muft  be  taken  relatively  ;  for  certainly 
it  is  Chrift,   and  not  Faith  that  is  that  Righteoufnefs.     IsnoE 
this  all  that  our  Divines  fay,  or  require  ?  and  fo   fay  I,  over 
and  over.         But  /*4«/doth  not  refolve  there  Q  what  is  the 
Condition  on  which  Chrifl  makes  over  this  Righteoufnefs  of 
his   ]  fo  dire  Sly,  but  collaterally.     8.  Or  if  you  fay  he  do : 
yet  if  Paul  fpcak  of  out?  firfl  pofleffion  of  Juftification,  I  fay 
it  is  without,  not  only  the  operation,  but  the  prefence  of  works, 
which  is  more  then  you  fay.  9.   Or  whether  he  fpeak  of  begun, 
or  continued  Juftification,  I  fay  we  arejuftified  without  works 
in  Tmls  fenfe  :  yea  that  they  are  not  fo  much  as  a  condition  of 
the  continuance  of  Juftification.     For  works  in  PauIs  fenfe 
relate  to  the  reward  as  of  dehr,  and  not  of  Grace.    As  a  man 
that  works  to  yearn  wages,  as  Pj»/ plainly  faith,  /few. 4.4  To 
him  that  worketh,  the  Reward  is  not  of  Grace ,  but  of  Debt. 
Thefe  works  I  difclaim  as  finfull  in  their  ends.     But  obeying  the 
Gofpel,   or  being  willing  that  Chrift  who  hath  redeemed  us, 
fliould  rule  over  us,  and  running  that  we  obtain,  and  fighting 
the  good  fight  of  faith,  and  fuffcring  with  Chrift  tljatwemay 
be  glorified  with  him,  and  improving  our  Talent,  and  enduring 
to  the  end,  andfo  doing  good  works,  and  laying  up  a  good 
foundation  againft  the  time  to  come  •'  I  think  Paul  excludes 
not  any  of  thefc  from  being  bare  condition?,  or  caufe  Jiue  ^nilft'is 
wo«of  our  Juftification  at  Judgement,  or  the  continuance  of  it 
here,    ayrlhrahams  faith  excluded  works  in  Pauls  fenfe,  -as  be- 
fore, but  not  works  in  this  fenfe,  or  in  fAtnes  his  fenfe.     When 
you  fly  my  fenfe  for  reconciling  Paul  and  fawes  cannot  be 
admitted,  i .  I  would  you  had  cold  me  what  way  to  do  it  better: 


Ci<57) 


and  anfwcrcd  what  I  have  faid  inthac.  2.  Your  reafon  appears 
.  to  me  of  no  feeming  fo^cc.     For  firft  you  fay  [  the  one  faith  a 
Juftification  by  faith  without  works,  you  make  Faith  as  well 
as  works,  &c,  ]     Anfrver.  1.  T^a/ faith  not  barely  withou: 
works,  but  without  the  works  of  the  Law.     And  I  have  (View- 
ed you  what  he  means  by  works,  Rtm.4.^.  2,  I  fay  no  more 
then  ^-^wf/jthat  a  man  is  juftified  by  vvorks.and  not  by  faith  on- 
ly :   i  believe  both  thefc  Scriprurcs  are  true,  and  need  no  re- 
conciling, as  having  no  contradidion  in  the  terms.     And  yet  [ 
fpeak  not  fo  broad  ufualiy,  as  fames  doth.  Where  you  fay  that 
Q  the  Orthodox  do  fweetly  reconcile  them]    I  know  not  who 
you  mean  by  the  Orthodox.    For  I  doubt  not  but  you  know 
the  variety  of  inrcrpretacions  to  reconcile  them.    Pifcator  and 
Vemble  have  one  Interpretation,  £nd  way  of  Reconciliation; 
Ca/vit),  Paratii  and  moft  D^'ines  atiother.     Camera  confuteih 
thebeft  eflcemed,and  hath  another,    Brochmond  with  moft  of 
the    Lutkcravs  have  anotbe:.      J  ic.    Laurer.tiui  ,  Althemer^ 
and  many  moretcli  us  of  divers;  which  of  thcfe  you  mean 
by  the  Orthodox,  I  know  nor.     But  if  you  exclude  all  thofe 
from  the  Orthodox,  that  fay  as  I  fay  in  this,  you  will  exclude 
as  Learned  Divine?,  and  well  reputed  of,  as  moft  £«rfl;>f  hath 
^•'ed,  r/i^-excelient  ConraJ.  Bcrgiw^Ludov.  Crocius.fohcVJ.CrOm 

•  f,  Joh.;n.  Berglus  &c.Who  though  they  all  difpute  for  Juftifi- 
cation  by  fath  without  works,underftandingit  of  the  firft  Jui'ti- 
fication  (  for  moii  Divinss  have  taken  Juftification  to  be  rigidly 
fimul  gt*  fewel,  till  Dr.  Do^Mam  evinced  that  it  is  a  continued 
Aft  )  yetthey  both  take  worki  for  meriting  works, that  refpect 
the  revvard  as  of  Debt,    and  they  fa/  that  othcrwife  Obedi- 

.. c  i&  d  Condition  I  or  caufe  as  they  make  it  )  of  continuing, 
ot  no*  lofing  JuiHfication  once  attained.  And  is  not  that  to  fay 
as  much  as  ]?And  many  more  I  can  name  you  that  fay  as  m.uch. 
And  you  approve  of  Mr.  'B.>i>  book.which  faith  that  rvorkj  (  or 
apnrpofeto\\'a/l;^'nit''oGod  J  do  '^nfiifie  as  a  pajfne  qualification 
of  the  SubleH:  capable  ofj'ijltfi^iition.  You  add  that  \_  W-  way 
difpute^  &.C.  bt<tjou  kj^iorv  not  ho^  a  godly  man  at  his  death  can 
Icok^  on  h's  Graces  as  Coniitions  of  the  Coven.ir.t  fulfilled  hy  him, 
&c.  J  Which  fpeech  feems  ftrange  to  me.  Iconfefs  if  it 
be  fO;  lam  un^jdly.    Fori  have  been  as  oft,  and  as  long  to 

the 


Ci<58) 


theexpe(^atk)n  of  deathas  moft  inen,and  flill  am;  and  yoe 
I  em  fo  far  from  being  afraid  of  this,tbat  I  fliould  live  and  d^  e  in 
lionet  rid  ieljti.'.nn  ,  it  1  cculd  rot  Icok  upon  the  cordiu- 
onsol"  ibeCovcngr.toj  Crsce  fulfilled  by  my  felf  through  goes 
uorkirg?.    If  by  cur  Graces  ^cu  mean  Habits,  J  think  it  more 
improper  to  call  them  the  fulfiliirg  the  conditions  of  the  Cove- 
nant,    For  what  you  fay  of  thcPapii's,  youknov  howfunda- 
ir.entally  alir.eft  ibcy  d  ffcr  frcmme  in  this,  confounding  the 
Covenants  Righteoufncfs ,  ^c.   If  it    wtre  not  to  one  that 
knows  it  better    then  my  felf,  I  weuld  (V.ew  wherein.    For 
yourqueftion,  How  come  the  imperfedicns  in  our  conditions 
to  fce  pardoned  ?  You  know  I  have  fully  anfwered  it,  both  in 
the  Aphorifms,  and  Appendix.    And  I  would  rather  yoH  bad 
given  me  oncdifcovery  oftbe  infuflfkiency  of  that  anfwer,  then 
asked  the  QueAion  again.  Briefly  thus.  Cuilt  is  an  obligation 
to  punifliment  (  as  it  ts  here  to  be  underAood  )  Pardon  is  a 
freeing  from  that  Obligation,  or  Guilt  and  Puniflimenr.     All 
l^unifhment  is  due  by  fome  Law.     According  to  the  Law  or 
Covenant  of  Works  the  impeifedion  of  cur  Faith,  Love,  Obe- 
dience ,  &c,    defeivc   puniftiment ,  and  Chrift  hath  fatisficd 
that  Law,  and  procured forgivenefs  of  thefe imperfcfl/ons,  and 
fo  acquit  us  from  Guilt  ard  punftimcnt.     The  new  Law,  or 
Covenant  of  Grace  dcch  not  threaten  death  to  any  but  final 
Unbelievers,  and  fo  tot  to  the  imperfedicn  of  our  Faith,  Love, 
Obedience,  where   they  are  fircere.      And  where  the  Law 
ihreatneth  not  Punifliment,  there  is  no  obligation  to  Punifli- 
Hi  ent  (  or  Guilt  )  on  the  party  from  that  Law,  and  fo  no  work 
for  Pardon.      Imperfed  believers  perform  the  conditions  of 
the  new  Covenant  truly:  and  it  condemneth  none  for  iraper- 
fedtionof  degree^  where  there  is  fincerity  .-No  man  is  ever  pa  ra- 
tioned, whoTYi  the  new  Law  condemneth,  that  is,  final  Unbe- 
iicvcrs,  or  Reje6crsof  Chrift.    So  that  Chrift  removeih,  or 
forgiveth  that  obligation  to  punifbmenr,  which  by  the  Law  of 
Work?  dorh  fall  on  us  for  cur  impetfedions.    jftnd  for  the  Law 
of  Grace  where  it  obligeih  not  to  punifliment,  that  obligation 
which  is  not.  cannot  be  taken  off-   nor  that  man  parcored, 
that  VI ss  nevtr  guilty.     Your  C^eflion  cccafionethmetobe 
unmannerly  in  opening  thcfe  eafie  things  to  you,  that  I  doubt 

noE 


069) 

^mt  knew  them  fare  twenty  years  ago  and  more.  Though  I 
confefslhad  not  the  clear  appreheniions  of  them  feveni-cars 
ago.  What  ever  I  was  then  thought  by  others,  I  confefs  1  was 
ignoranV.  and  am  glad  that  God  hath  in  any  meafure  healed 
4  ignorance,  though  with  the  lofs  of  my  reputat.onof  being 
Orthodox.  Where  you  add  that  condu.ons  have  ajnoral  effi- 
ciency, either  you  mean  all  or  fome;  If  all.  or  .f  th.s  whereof 
we  are  in  fpecch,  though  1  am  io:h  ^<>/«"^^^"'.'^^!,>^"i"  ^iJ'- 
lofophy,  yet  I  muft  confefs  I  never  read  fo  much  m  any  Auchor, 
norcanfo'cemyfelf  tobei.evcic,C.«^M  ^«^«;;",  '/^^^/^ 
fAiu^.  h  is  as  SMler  and  others,  a  mcer  Antecedent,  i  he 
word  .1^.r./isambiguou..  but  if  you  mean.t  as  Iconjedureyou 

•  do.for  an  efficiency,  interpretative  in  fenlc  of  Law,  as  ifchc  Law 
ivouldafcnbc  efficiency  to  him  that  fulhlls  the  condition  :  lu- 
terlydeny  it  in  the  present  cafe  .  orif  ycumcan  that  our  fulhl- 
lingthe  conditions  hath  an  efficiency  on  God  to  move  him  to 
iuftifieus.as  an  impulfive  procatarctick  caufe  ;  I  not  only  deny 
it,  but  deny  that  any  fuch  caufe  is  properly  with  God,  or  hath 
efficiency  on  him  .  nor  can  it  have  the  pperation  of  the  fi- 
nal caufe,  which  fome  call  moral,  feeing  it  is  noneof  Oods 
end,  nor  can  any  thing  move  God  but  God,  nor  be  his  end  but 
himfelf.  If  you  mean  by  moral  efficiency  any  thing  elfc  which 
is  indeed  no  efficiency,  I  flick  not  on  meer  words. 

Sr  1  lliould  net  have  prefumed  to  cxpcd  fo  much  labour 
fromyouastowriieafheetformyfatisfadion,  had  I  not  per- 
ceived th^t  others eicpea  much  more  to  Ufspurpofe,  and  that 
vcur  letters  exprefs  that  hereafter  you  intend  more.  It  you 
deny  rr.eyouranfwer  to  this,I  will  trouble  you  no  more.  And 
becaufel  would  have  your  labour  as  (hort  as  may  be,  ^  (hall 
only  defire  vour  anfwer  to  thefe  few  Qaeftions.  which  I  ground 
on  both  your  Letters,  Becaufe  the  clear  refolving  of  the(c,will 
bethereaJieft  waytofatisfieme.  ,    ..^  ru 

Q»(fl  I.  Harh  the  Covenant  of  Grace  (which  promifeth 
Juftification  and  Glorification:)  any  condition  on  our  parts,  or 

none?  If  it  have  ■  ,  ^,    ■• 

£lHijl.  i.What  are  the  Conditions?Is  not  Love  and  Obedience 

part  of  the  Condition?       '  > ,      -v 

£iHt(i.  3  .Muft  not  thofe  Conditions  be  fulfilled  by  our  felvcs  ? 


C  lyo): 


ot  hathChrift  fulfilled  them  by  biiofelf  forany.man. 

^Iftefi.  4.  IF  we  muft  fulfill  chem,  why  may  not  a  dying  m:jn 
look  on  them  ?  Or  what  meansP-iw/torejoycein  theteftimony 
of  his  Confdjnce,th»t  in  limplicicy  andgjdly  (inccrity  he  bad 
his  converfation?  &j.\nd  that  he  had  fought  a  good  fight,  and 
finifhedhisdourfe,  er-.and  that  in  ill  good  confciencfijC^r.and 
Hez^^kjab ,  Remember  Lord  that  1  have  walked  before  thee, 

J^eft.  5.  Can  a  man  have  any  afTurance  ordinarily  that 
death  (hall  not  let  him  into  Hell,  who  hath  no  afTurance  that 
he  hath  performed  thefe  cjnditions,  and  how  H-iould  he  have  it  ? 
Can  he  know  that  all  (hall  work  to  him  for  good,  though  he 
know  not  whether  he  love  God?or  that  there  i>  no  condemnati- 
on to  him ,  though  he  know  not  that  he  is  in  Chrift,  and 
walk  not  after  the  fie(h,  but  after  the  Spirit  ? 

£>Hef.  6.  If  our  Love  and  Obedience  have  no  tendency  to 
falvarion  ,  but  as  meer  figures,    then  is  not  the  Antinom'.- 
an  DoSrinc  true,  that  we  may  not  Ad  for  Salvation  ? 
.^.  7. What  do  you  mean  yourTelf,whcn  you  write  againft  thofc 
that  deny  Repentance  to  be  a,  Condition  to  q'4ali(ie  the  SubjeH:  to  ob^ 
taiKforgiveneft^  ^«^  4  y/^w  Led.  20.of  Juftification?  Andwhep 
you  fay  that  Scripture  limits  J nfltfication^and  Pardon  only  totbofe 
Subject  that  are  fo  andfoejtMlified.  p,  171.  where  you  inftance 
in  Repentance^  C'^^feffion^  Turnings  Forgiving  others^  c^".  and 
make  faith  zn  Injirumental  caule^  but  hy^there  are  wanj  qtiali- 
fications  in  the  Subject,    p.  172.  And    what  mean  you  when 
you  fay,  p. no.    In  fame   grofs  fms  there  are   many  condt li- 
ens reqtiifte  (   be  fides  humiliation)  without  Vi>hfch  Tardon  of 
(In  cannot  be  obtained  :    where  you  inftance  in  i?<y?/r«/j«?«.  Be- 
iides  tbofe,  5.  148,149,150.    Isitnot  fafe  when  a  man  hath 
prerformed  thefe  conditions,  co/(7o)^o>^'^^a»  either  living  or  dy- 
ifig}  Ot  what  do  you  fay  lefs  then  I  do  here  .^  I  know  you  arc 
none  of  the  men  of  contention,  and  therefore  will  not  recant 
your  own  Dodrine  in  oppoficion  to  me.     And  if  you  did  not 
mean  that  thek  arc  conditions  of  Pardon,and  Juftification,when 
y on  hy  the/  are,  whocanunderftand  you  ?  If  ihok  grofs  fins 
beintheunjuftified,youwillnotfay  that  the  conditions  of  his 
Pardon  are  no  conditions  of  his  Juftificacion.  I  know  that  you 

give 


c  ^rn 


give  ffjore  to  faith  (  and  fo  to  rosn  )  then  I  do,  vi<.-  Co  be  the 
Jnjirumtnt  of  his  own  jupficAtiop^  (  which  I  will  tiot  contend 
againft  withany  thatby  an  improper  fenfeof  the  word  Inftru- 
mcnt,  do  differ  only  in  a  term  )  butwhatdoyou  ^We^efs  tv  Rt- 
pe>ita»c€,ind  the  reft  then  I  do  ?  yeu  fay  they  arc^ondkions.atid 
i  fay  no  more.  . 

.^«.8  And  whatdothcgeneralityofour  Divines  mean,  when 
they  fay  that  Faith' and  new  Obedience  are  our  conditions  of 
the  Covenant?  As  I  have  cited  out  of  T'sre^r^,  Sci).trpi-fis, 
*yviUet,  Vifhator,  Junius^  Areiifis^  Aljltdifts,  tlrho  faith,  the  con- 
dition of  the  new  Covenant  of  Grace  is  partly  faith,  and  part- 
ly Evangel'c/«l  Obedience,  or  Holinefs  of  life,  prottcding 
from  faith  in  Chrift.  PifiinB.  C^ap.  17.  /».73.  And  fVeviitltn 
the  like^  &c.  If  it  be  faid  that  they  mean  'hey  ate  conditions  of 
Salvation  bat  not  of  Juftification  ;    Then 

<^«f/?.  9.  Whether  and  how  it  can  be  proved  that  001*  fin a4 
Juftification  at  Judgement  (which  you  have  tmlv  fhewed  is 
more  compleat  then  this^«y?ij''""rttf/(?rf<f,  and  Our  Glorifies  ion 
have  different  conditions  on  our  part,  aqd  fo  of  our  per  levering 
Juftiiicationheie.  '-i-y.t  .. 

^e(}.    10.    And  whether  it  be  any  lefs  difparagement- to 

"Chrift  to  have  mans  works  to  be  the  conditions  of  his  Salvation, 

then  to  be  the  bire  conditions  of  his  ultimate  and  continued 

^Jaftification  >     Seeing  Chrift  is  1  Savioar  ^s  properly  as  a  Jufti- 

fier,  and  Salvation  comprizcth all. 

-^tte/}.,  IT.  What  tolcarablc  fenfe  can  be  given  of  that 
multitude  of  plain  Scrip'urcs  which  I  have  cited  ?  Thef.6o. 
For  my  part,  when  Thave  oft  ftudyed  how  to  forfake  my  prefent 
Judgement,  the  bare  reading  of  the  a>  of  CMattht^io  hath 
iV\\\  utterly  filenced  me,if  there  were  no  more.  Much  more 
when  the  whole  Gbfpel  runs  in  the  like  ftnm. 

^nefi.  12.  Is  not  the  fulfilling  of  the  conditions  of  the 
new  Law  or  Covenant  enough  ro  denominate  the  party  righte- 
ous, that  is,  not  guilty  of  non  ftlfilling,  or  nor  obliged  to  pu- 
nifliment,  or  guilty  as  from  that  famft^w  Or  Covcnan  ?  And 
doth Tiot  every  man  that  is  faved  fo  fulfill  the  conditions  of  the 
new  Covenant  ?  and  fo  is  Evatgelically  righteous  ?  The  con- 
dition is  not  Believe,  m:i  ohej  ftrftEl!j^\i\Mfincerelj. 

1  z  ^«*/?. 


(I?^) 


^mfi.  13.  If  therebcnpfuch  rhmgas  a  pcrfonal  Right€- 
oufnefs  neceffary  to  lalvacion,  befidcs  imputed  Kightcoufnefs . 
1.  What  is  the  raeaningof  all  thofe  Scriptures  ciced  Thef.zz 
rhat  fay  there  is  ?  2.  And  of  our  Divines  that  fay  there  is  inhe- 
rent llighteoufnefs  ?  And  i.  What  real  difference  between  the 
godly  and  the  wicked,  the  faved  and  damned  ? 

«^«f//.i  4.  Have  you  found  out  any  lower  place  for  Love  and 
Qbedicnce,  then  to  be  bare  conditions,  tf  you  acknowledge 
Vftem  any  way  conducible  to  final  Juftification,  or  Salvation? 
If  you  have,  wlwt  place  is  it  ?  and  how  called  ?  and  why  hath 
it  nol  been  difcovered  unto  the  world  ?  To  fay  they  are^w/iA'- 
jicatiotjs  of  tht  Subje[l^\s  too  general,and  comprizcth  qualihcati- 
ons  of  diflfcrent  Natures ;  and  it  Chews  not  how  they  are  con- 
ducible to  the  faid  ends ;  and  why  a  man  may  not  be  faved  with^ 
out  qualifications,  as  well  as  with  chem.if  God  have  plbt  made 
•them  fo  much  as  conditions  ? 

^utft.  15.  Seeing  I  afcribe  not  to  Evangelical  Obedience 
iheleaft  part  of  Chrifts  Office  or  Honor,  nor  make  it  any  jot 
of  our  legal  Righteoufnefs,  where  then  lies  the  error  or  danger 
of  my  Dodrine  ? 

.^Hefi,  1 6.  Do  not  thofe  men  that  affirm  we  have  an  inberenc 
Righteoufnefs,  which  is  fo  pronounced  properly  by  the  Law  of 
works,  accufe  the  Law  of  Godforbleffing  and  curfing  the 
the  fame  man  and  adion  ?  And  how  can  that  Law  pronounce  a 
raan,orhisaftion  righteous,  which  curfeth  him,  and  condemn- 
cth  him  to  Hell  for  that  fame  Adion  ?  It  makes  me  amazed  to 
think  what  (hould  be  the  reafon  that  Divines  contefi  fo  much, 
that  ic  is  the  Law  of  Works  that  pronounceth  chem  inherently 
righteous,  which  they  know  condemns  them  ;  rather  then  the 
Law  of  Grace  or  new  Covenant,  which  they  know  abfolveth 
them  that  fincerely  perform  it.  When  all  Divines  acknowledge 
an  inherent  Righteoufnefs,  and  that  the  Law  of  Works  is  ful- 
filled by  none,  and  that  itpronnuncethnonerighteousibutthe 
fulfillers .  and  when  the  condition  of  the  new  Covenant  muft 
be  performed  by  all  that  will  be  faved  :  and  when  the  Holy 
Ghoft  faith  that  it  was  by  faith  (  and  fo  pronounced,  and  mea- 
fured  by  the  Law  of  faith  ,)  that  Ahel^  ( the  fecond  Righteous 
ffia-nin  the  world  ;  oSiircA  the  excellent  Sacrifice,  and  by  it  ob- 
tained 


(173; 


tained  witnefs  that  he  was  righteou^Go'd  tefllfying  of  his  gift, 
^e.  Heb.  1 1.4. 

^He^.  17.  Do  not  thofe  Divines  that  will  affirm  that  {_  our 
inherent  Righteoufnefs  is  Tq  called  from  its  imperfed  conformi^ 
ty  to  the  Law  of  works  ]  and  that  [  i:  is  the  Law  that  pronoun- 
ceth  them  righteous]  lay  a  clear grouud  for  Juftification by 
works  in  the  worft  fenle  ?  for  if  the  Law  pronounce  their  works, 
and  them  properly  righteous,  then  it  juftifieth  them  j  and  then 
what  need  have  they(at  leatt  lo  far ;  of  Chrift,  or  Pardon  ?  yea 
and  what  Law  (hall  condemn  them,  if  the  Law  of  Works  jufti- 
fiethcm  ?  AtUaftdothey  not  compound  their  Righteoufnefs 
(as  to  the  law  of  Works;  partly  of  Chriftsfatisfadion,  and 
partly  of  their  own  Works? 

^tfl,  1 8.  Whether  you  fliould  not  blame  Dr.  Prejlon-^ 
Mr.  Norton^  Mr.  Cuhtnvil,  Mr.  Throgmorton^  &c.  for  lay- 
ing by  the 'good  found  definition  of  Faith  fas  you  call  it)  as 
well  as  me  ?  And  is  it  not  great  partiality  to  let  the  fame  pals 
as  currant  from  them,which  from  mc  mull  be  condemned  ?  And 
why  would  you  agree  to  fuch  a  corrupt  definition,  being  one  of 
the  Affembly,  when  theirs  in  the  leflcr  Catechifm  (  and  indeed 
both  )  is  in  fence  the  very  fame  with  mine  ?  And  why  may  not 
I  be  judged  Orthodox  in  that  point,  when  I  heartily  fubfcribe 
te  the  National  Affemblies  Definition?  viz..  thatF^i/^  is  a 
faving  Grace,  tvhersby  rvtreceivei  and  reflon  Chri/i  alone  for 
Salvation^  as  he  it  offered  to  us  in  iheGofp^l."^ 
^.  19. Do  I  fay  any  more  then  the  AfTerably  faith  in  the  prcr 
ceding  Queflion?[ff/74f  doth  God  require  ofm,  that  we  may  efcap. 
hid  wrath  and  cttrfe  due  t§  us  for  fin  ?  Anfw.  (jodrequirtth  ofus(t(? 
efcape  the/aid  wrath  and  curfc,  &C.)  Faithin  fefhsChri/}^. repen- 
tance unto  life,  '^ith  the  diligent  u/e  cf  all  the  cuto;aril  meunJy 
"thereby  Chrijl  communicateth  to  Ui  the  benefits  of  Redemption.  J 
And  is  not  Juftification  one  benefit }  And  is  not  final  Jullincatir 
on  a  freeing  us  from  that  Curfe  ^ 

Slueft.  20.  Which  call  you  the  good,  found  definition  of 
Faith  .^  When  our  famous  Reformers  [.laced  it  in  AlTurance  ; 
Camera,  and  others  in  perfwalionC  fuch  as  is  in  the  under  ftand^ 
lag)  others  in  A(Fenr,as  Dr.  Downam,c^c  .Others  in  a  Belief  of 
God«  fpccial  Love,  and  that  fin  is  pardoned.    Oihccs  in  AtE- 

Z  3  ,  ancc 


('74) 


anceor  Recumbency.  Others  in  divers  of  thefe.  Some,  as 
Mr.  5^//,  calling  it  a  fiducial  ^f^:nt.  Others  an  obediential 
Affiancce-  Did  not  each  of  chefe  forf'kcthac  which  by  the 
former  was  accounted  the  good  found  Definition  ?  And  why 
ni3y  not  I  with  Dx.Preflon,  \Ar.' ivalli4,  tec.  fay  it  is  an  y-ic- 
C€ytarce/rc'Mfetit,pyHed  With  A^tntf  or  with  the  Aflcmbly,and 
the  reft,  f:.y  it  is  a  rtceivlng^  which  is  the  fame  in  a  more  Meta- 
phoric::ltirm. 

^Kejt.  IT.  If  you  fudge  as  MeUnchton.,  JahnCrociu/^Da- 
venr,:t,  zy^rnefins^  &c.  that  Faith  is  in  both  faculties ;  how  can 
you  then  over  leap  the  Elicite  Ads  of  the  will  (  which  have  re- 
Jptft  to  means;  hi>£eye,co»:e»tfre^  uti  ?■ 

^fft-  32.  Jf  the  formal  rcafon  of  juftifying  faith  lieina 
Belief  or  Perfwafion  that  Chrift  will  pardon  and  fava  us :  or 
in  an  Affiance  or  refting  on  him,  or.Trufting  to  him  only  for 
Salvation:  or  in  an  Acceptance  of  him  as  a  Saviour,  meerly 
to  juftifie  and  fa ve  from  Hell  ;  Why  then  are  not  almoit 
all  among  us  juftified  and  faved  ?  when  I  fcarce  meet  with  one 
of  an  hundred, that  is  not  unfeignedly  willing.that  Chrift  (hould 
pardon,  and  juftiiie,  and  fave  them,  and  do  verily  truft,  that 
Chrift  will  do  it  ;  and  the  freer  it  is,  the  better  they  like  it.  If 
ihey  may  whore  and  drink,and  be  covetous, and  let  alone  all  the 
pradifeof  Godlinefs,and  ^ct  be  faved, they  willconfent.  If  it  be 
faid  that  they  reft  not  on  Chrift  for  Juftification  fincerelyjl  Anf 
They  doitrcally,and  unfeignedly, and notdi{remblingly,whi9h 
as  we  may  know  in  all  probability  by  others,  fowemay  know 
it  certainly  by  our  own  hearts,  while  unregenerate.  So  that  it  is 
not  the  natural,  but  the  moral  Truth,  that  is  wanting  :  And 
what  is  that  ?  And  wherein  is  the  EfTen'ial,  formal  difference 
between  a  wicked  mans  refting  on  Chrirt  for  JuftiHcation,  and  a 
true  Believers  ?  To  fay  it  is  feen  in  the  fruits,  is  not  to  (hew  the 
EfTential  difference. 

^efl.  23.  If  refting  on  Chrift  for  Juftification  be  the  only 
condition  of  final  Juftification,  What  is  the  reafon  that  Perkins., 
Bolton.,  Hooker, Prefion^Taylor.  Elton  jVloately,2LX\^3i\\  the  godly 
Divines  alfo  yet  liv  ng  do  fpend  moft  oftheir  labour  to  bring. men 
to  obey  Chrift  as  their  lord,  and  not  the  hundreth  line  or  word 
to  prefs  them  to  Truft  that  he  will  pardon  and  fave  them?  All  the 

po  werfull 


C^TT) 


powei'full  Prrachers  that  ever  I  heard,  however  they  d^/'pute, 
yec"when  they  are  preaching  to  the  generality  of  pe>ple,  they 
zealouQycry  down  iazinefs,  lukejvarmncfs,  negUgenc8,unholy- 
nefs,  prophanefs,  &c.  As  thic  which  would  be  the  liklycft  caufe 
of  the  damnation  of  the  people.  Bat  if  only  the  forefaid 
faith  be  the  condition,  and  all  other  Graces  or  Duties  be  but 
mecr  fignal  effeAs  of  th  s,  and  (ignal  qualifications  of  the  fub- 
jeft,  and  not  fo  much  a«  conditions,  wtut  reej  all  this?  Were 
it  not  then  better  to  perfwade  all  people,  even  when  they  rire 
whoring, or  drunk,  to  truft  on  Chnft  to  pardon  and  jaftifie 
them  ?  And  then  when  they  have  the  tree  and  caufe ,  the 
fruits  and  fignal  effeds  will  follow. 

^eft.  24.  Yea,  Why  do  the  beft  Divines  preach  fo  much^ 
againft  Prefump:ion  ?  And  what  is  Prcfumption  ,  if  it  be  not 
this  very  faith  which  Divines  call  juftifying?  viz..  the  Trulling 
to  Chrill  for  Pardon  and  Salvation  only,  without  takng  hm  for 
their  King  and  Prophet  ?  If  it  be  faid  that  tliis  laft  mull  be  pre- 
fent,  though  not  juftifie  ;  How  can  the  bare  prefencc  of  an  idle 
Accident  fo  ma^»e, or  marr  the  efficacy  ot  the  caufe? 

«v«<?/?.25.1f  to  be  unwilling  that  Chrift  (bould  raign  overus, 
be  part  of  the  diredly  condemning  fin,  L«)^r  I9.  zy.  whv'  is 
not  the  willingnelshe  fliould  raign,  part  of  faving ,  juftifying 
faith  >      . 

£iuefl.  16.  SeeingreftinginChriflisnoPhyfical  apprehen- 
nonof  him  f  who  is  bodily  in  Heaven  j  nor  of  his  Righteouf- 
nefs  (  which  is  not  a  being  capable  of  fucb  an  apprchenfiori  ) 
How  can  that  Refting  juftifi."  more  then  any  other  Ad>  but  only 
as  it  is  the  condition  to  which  the  Promifc  is  mWe?  Reftrng 
on  a  friend  for  a  Denefit,  makes  it  got  your*,  but  hi?  gift  dices 
that.  As  Perkins  (  cited  by  me  )T&  believi  the  K:n^.icmof 
FrAKCe  Podlb*  mine,  wakes  it  not  mtxe  :  'But  to  belicvs  Ckrijc; 
and  the  Kingdom  of  Htavm,  c^c.  (  vfj.loc.  where  he  faith  as 
much  as  I  j  vol.  i.  p.  662.  If  God  had  not  faid  (^  He  that 
believeth  fiall  be  jujiifieei  and  faved ,  ]  would  BtUevitrg  have 
done  it  ?  And  if  jie  had  faid,  [  He  tlMt  refenteth^  or  /avcJf^  cr 
caUtth  OK  the  name  of  the  Lord,  J7:>.di  be  jtt(i*Hed  nr  lAved  \  would 
not  thefe  have  done  it  ?  if  fo  ;  then  doth  not  faith  juftifie 
-dircdly,  as  the  conJition  of  the  Gift,  Promife,  or  new  Cove- 
nant? 


nam?  \r\d'\[s apprthenfton hhntki aptttudt  to  be  fee  apart  fof 
ibis  Office  ;  And  if  it  juftifie  as  a  condition  of  the  Promifc : 
muft  not  others  do  it  fo  far  as  they  arc  parts  of  the  Condi- 
tion? 

5iV,  If  yea  (hould  deny  me  chc  favour  I  hope  for  in  refol- 
ving  tbefe  doubts,  yttJetme  hear  whether  1  may  cxped  it  or 
not.  And  in  the  («rfriwl(hall  fearch  in  jealoufie,  and  pray  for 
diredion  ;  But  till  your  Arguments  (hall  change  my  judge- 
ment, I  remain  confident  that  I  can  maintain  mofi  of  the  ty^nti- 
»r7wirt»  Dotages  againft  any  man  that  denyech  the  principles  of 
my  Book  :  and  that  which  is  accounted  novelty  in  it,  is  but  a 
more  explicate  ,  diftmd ,  neceffary  delivery  of  common 
Truths, 

Tours, 


Richard     Baxter. 


^pril  5, 
1^50. 


IAra  forry  that  you  are  not  in  capacity  for  the  motion  I  pro- 
fered  .*  I  thought  difcourfe  would  not  fo  much  infeeble  yon, 
efpecially  when  it  would  have  been  in  fo  loving  a  way  .-  And  I 
judged  it  the  more  feafabie,  bccaufe  I  had  been  informed  of 
a  late  folcmn  conference  you  had  about  Padohaptifm,  which 
could  not  but  much  fpend  you.  I  (hall  prcfs  no  more  for  it,  al- 
though this  very  letter  doth  abundantly  confirm  me,  that  let- 
ters are  but  a  lofs  of  time  :  for  one  word  might  have  prevented 
many  large  digreflions.  Is  nr)t  that  endeavour  of  yours  in 
your  feventh  queftion  to  prove  out  of  my  book,that  Repentance 
is  a  necefiary  condition,  or  qualification  in  the  Snbjed  to  be 
pardoned,  &c.  a  meer  impertinency  ?  You  earneftly  defirc 
iatisfadtion  of  your  confcience,  therefore  I  cannot  think  you 

do 


(177) 


do  wilfully  miftakc.  For  is  that  the  ftate  of  the  queftion  with 
us  ?  Is  it  not  this,  whether  the  Gofpel  Righteoufnefs  be  made 
ours,  otherwife  then  by  believing  ?  You  fay  by  believing,  and 
Obedience,  1  fay  only  believing.  I  fay  faith  is  only  the 
condition  juftifying  ,  or  inftrumcnt  receiving,  you  makfi  a 
juftifying  Repentance,  a  juftifying  Patience:  you  make  orher 
ads  of  grace  juftifying  as  well :  fo  that  whereas  heretofore,.we 
only  had  jufti^ing  faith,  now  there  arc  as  many  other  qualities, 
and  all  juftifying,  as  there  are  Graces.  So  that  I  do  firmly 
hold  (  and  It  needs  no  recantation  )  that  repentance  and  other 
exercifes  of  Grace  are  antecedent  qualifications,  and  are/wf- 
dia.  orMnata^  in  the  ufe  whereof  only  pardon  can  be  ha4.  But 
what  is  this  to  you  ?  Who  exprcfly  maintain  the  righteoufnefs 
of  the  Covenant  of  Grace  to  be  made  ours,  upon  our  godly 
working  ,  as  well  as  believing.  If  therefore  you  had  fpenc 
your  fclrto  Qiewthat  faith  had  no  peculiar  Inftrumentality  in 
our  juftification,  butwhat  other  Graces  have,  thenyouhad 
hit  the  mark.  What  is  more  obvious,  then  that  there  arc  ma- 
ny conditions  m  juflificato^  which  are  not  in  a^a  julrificationta  ? 
The  fattening  of  the  head  to  the  body  is  a  ncceffary  condition  in 
homine  vidente,  but  it  \s  not  fna^H  videntii.  You  grant  in- 
deed fome  precedency  to  faith,  but  you  make  Faith  and  Works 
aqae^  though  not  aquAliter^  the  conditions  of  Juftification.  I 
fhould  fay  much  more  to  the  ftate  of  the  qucftion.but  I  forbear; 
In  other  things  you  feem  to  come  off ;  and  though  I  do  not  fay 
you  recede  from  your  A flertions,  yet  you  much  moHifiethem, 
that  I  need  not  therein  contend  with  you.  Bat  here  is  the 
ftick.  Let  it  be  dcmonftrated,that  whereas  the  Scripture  in  the 
current  of  it  attributes  Juftification  to  believing  only  '-  as 
throuih  f*tth\,  and  by  Faith  ,  and  through  faith  in  his 
hloodf  that  you  can  as  truly  fay,  its  received  by  love,  and  iti 
through  love  of  his  blood  flied  for  our  fakes,  &c.  This  is  a 
little  of  that  much  which  might  be  faid  to  the  ftate  of  the  quefti- 
on This  I  Judge  new  Doflrine,  juftifying  Repentance,  jufti- 
fying Charity.  And  in  my  Letter  I  laid  down  an  Argument, 
R^pm.^.  Concerning  sy^^r^^fc^w;  Juftification,  the  Pattern  of 
all  others.  To  this  you  reckon  up  minyAnfwers,  but  I  fee  not 
the  Argument  iliaken  by  it.  tirft  you  fay,  you  exclnde  a  co-ofe- 

A  a        .  ration 


'('78; 


,  ruticM  iftftive^  but  why  do  we  ftrive  about  words?  You  do 
not  ei;clude  jror^/j*f/?.'/;;>;^,  as  well  as  faith,  let  thecxprellions 
be  what  i hey  will.  Wl>cicas  Paul  faith,  he  vpchld  btfonnd  ha- 
v':r.g  the  Righeoufr.ejs  n h  clo  t-s  bj faith, "^OM  Will  add,  and ^ifhch  n 
by  love^  by  zeal.  '  2 .  You  defire  it  to  be  provei:!^  that  Faui  excludes 
all  ■A'crks  under  Anyr.cuon;  1  think  its  very  eafily  done:  Irirft, 
becaufe  of  the  ;>ww(?i/^r^e;>;?i7y;/i'5«  between  Fauh  and  Works  j 
now  you  will  contradid  /-'<««/;  Argument,  and  give  a  ternum^ 
works  that  are  of  Grace.  But  the  Apoftles  oppoHtion  is  fo 
immediate  here  and  in  other  places,  becween  faith  and  any  thing 
of  ours  ,  that  he  admits  of  no  med'um.  2.  He  inftances  in 
Abrahnmt  works,  and  excludes  them.-  now  were  Al/rahams 
works,  works  done  by  the  meet  ftrength  of  the  Law  ?  Did  not 
-Abr<ihxms  Obedience,  and  other  works  flow  from  Grace  .^ 
Were  Aby-ahims  works  in  oppofition  to  Cbrift  }  Yet  even  tliefi 
are  excluded.  3.  Heexcludesallworksunderany  notion  by  the 
oppofuion,  juftifying,  covering,  all  is  wholly  attributed  unto 
God.  4.  The  AfTertion  is  univcrfal  :  The  Apoftle  faith,  with- 
out works  in  general,  ver.  6.  And  he  works  not,  vtr.  5.  Laftly, 
By  Lhe  teftimony  he  brings  from  the  Pfalmift^  that  bleffednefs 
is  where  fin  is  not  imputed,  whrere  it  is  forgiven  ;  Thefe  rea- 
fons  do  evidence  that  he  excludes  works  under  all  notions  in  the 
aft  of  Juflificarion,  though  not  from  the  perfon  juftified.  5.  You 
fay,  kj'i^'  then  ^a'i!h]zmts  trf:e  }  6utla<k,if  there  bejuftifying 
work's  how  faith  Paul  true  ?  But  again,  James  faith  tiuc  ;  for 
this  faith  which  in  refpeft  of  its  aft  .t^iw.'r**,  doth  only  juftifie, 
jet  it.  works  ad extr^.  The  old  AfTertion  is jS^^i  cjua  viva^  not 
(jut  ziva.  You  Ipeak  ofafecming  Antilogie among  theor- 
thodox  in  th45  reconciliation,  but  though  all  go  rot  eademfemi" 
ta.  yet  they  do  eacicm  vsk  againft"  works  under  any  notion 
whatfoever  in  the  aft  of  Juflification  4,  You  argue  that  faith 
as  an  Inftrument  is  excluded.  Thus  Bellarmine  alfo,  apprehend 
dcre  e(l  fpfsf,  therefore  faith  is  excluded  :  But  non  [ecjuitur  : 
Fairh  ispaifiv?  in  irslnfttumentality  ^  and  although  to  believe, 
be  ^Cr.fKMatical  aUi,/:^  its  verbum  aftivMnj^  yet  its  phyjic  »  or 
iTrn'^va-Kh  p^Jfive.  A  man  by  believing,  doth  not  operfrl ,  but 
recipcre  ;•  As  videre,audire^trQ  Grammatical alHons^  but  Phyfical 
0?  nuturfrl  paffions :  now  you  cannot  fay  thus  of  the  exercifes  of 

other 


Ci7;>) 

Other  Graces :  this  is  the  feeming  ftrcngth  of  your  Exccpcion?, 
For  Repentance  is  not  excluded  as  tjti.iiifj/ir^g,  but  as  recipient 
which  is  a  tifth  Exception. 

As  For  your  difcourfejWheiherT.iJw/dirpuLes  what  is  our  Righ- 
teoufnefs?  or  upon  whit  terms  it  is  made  over  to  u«,  itdo:h 
not  much  mitccr;  for  indeed  Paul  fpeaks  to  both  ihoK  0"ly 
inclulivelyor  collareral!y,'is  you  fay  :  but  that  which  hcchrefiy 
intends,  is  to  fhew  in  what  manner  we  ace  juflifieJ,  whether  by 
believing  or  working,  and  thefe  he  makes  two  immediate  oppo- 
fitcs,  not  g-anting  any  ttrtium.  You  fpeak  of  Fauh  taken  re- 
latively for  Chrilts  Rig'-.teoufnefs  ^  but  how  can  you  find  out 
fuch  a  figure  for  faith  in  your  fence,ur,!efs  you  Wilf  acknowledge 
Loveor  Obedience  relatively  for  Chrifts  Righreoufnefs  ?  Indeed 
thofe  that  hold  Fai  h  inftrumentally,receiving  the  whole  righte- 
Oiifnefsof  Chrift,  and  no  other  Grace,thcy  often  fpeak  of  faith 
taken  relativcly,but  fo  cannot  you,who  hold  that  not  only  feeing 
this  brazen  Serpent,  but  any  other  adions  of  fence  will  as  well 
heal  the  wounded  Chriftian.  You  fay  you  acknowledge  the 
AfTemblies  definition  of  refting  or  receiving,  you  cannot  take  in 
that  fence,  as  they  declare  it,  as  the  Scripture  words  which  are 
Metaphorical ,  do  imply  :  for  its  the  retting  of  a  burdened 
foul  qpon  Chrift  only  for  Righfeoufnefs,  and  by  this  ChriHs 
Rightcbufnefs  is  made  over  to  us  •  and  its  a  receiving  of  Chrift, 
ss  the  h«nd  embraceth  any  ObjeA  :  now  you  make  the  Righfe- 
oufnefs of  Chrift  made  over  to  us  iriany  other  exercife  of  Grace 
as  well  as  this,  so  that  although  you  would  willingly  feem  not  to 
recede  from  others,  yet  you  plainly  do.-and  although  you  think 
your  Affcrrlons  are  but  more  diftind  explications,  yet  they 
are  indeed  deftrudive  Aflertions  to  what  our  Divines  do  deli- 
verrneither  may  vou,  while  you  intend  to  difpute,  exaftly  build 
upon  fome  homiletical  or  poputerexprefsionin  any  mans  book. 
You  reply  to  a  fecond  part  in  ray  Letter  :  whether  a  godly 
man  dying,  may  be  aflfeded  according  to  your  pofition,  and 
thereupon  you  inflance  in  Hez.ek}ah  tPdu/^and  that  no  man  can 
dye  with  comfort  without  the  evidence  of  thefe  works.  But  is 
this  the  ftate  of  the  queftion  with  us  ?  Do  you  think  that  I  de- 
ny a  godly  life  to  be  a  comfortable  teftimony,  and  aneceflary 
qualification  of  a  man  for  pardon  ?  You  cannot  think  that  you 

A  a  2  fpeak 


i 


(I  So) 

fpcak  to  the  point  in  this,     But  here  is  the  queftion,  Can  a 
godiy  man  dying,  think  the  Hightcoufnefs  of  Chrift  ii  made  hjs 
by  working  or  believing?  l$u  repcnt»  and  Chnils  Rtghceoul- 
neis  is  by  this  made  yours,  and  reft  in  Chrift  ?   Ccrcainlychc 
dying  Chrjftianisin  agonies  direded  to  this  refting  onChrift, 
CO  the  eying  of  this  brazen  Serpent,  not  to  be  Touud  in  any 
thing  but  the  Righceoufnefs  by  faith.  Its  an  ad  of  Dependance, 
not  of  Obedience  that  ir.terefts  us  in  Chrifts  Righteoufncfs.  its 
that  puts  on  the  robes  of  Chrift,  that  our  nakednefs  may  not 
appear.     And  that  is  very  harfli  ftill,  which  you  exprefs,  to  ex- 
ped  thc^Righrcoufnefs  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace  upon  the 
conditions  fulfilled  by  your  felf,  through  Gods  working.,  lam 
unwilling  to  parallel  this  with  fome  paflagcs  that  might  be  quo- 
ted out  of  unfound  Authors  ;    but  that  I  am  confident,  how- 
foever  your  Pen- writes,  you  have  a  tuitJfimNmeJI  to  rcA  only 
upon  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs.and  that  by  bare  refting,  and  b^leiv- 
ingyou  look  for  a  Righteoufncfs.     As  Philofophers  fay,  we  fee 
or  hear  tKtus  recipiendo^  not  extra  mittendo  :  otherwife  "Beliar- 
mine  argues  confonanCly  enough,  that  Love  would  juftifie  as 
well  as  faith ;  but  we  fay  that  Fatth  doth  pati,  Love  doth  agere. 
Not  but  that  faith  is  an  aUive  grace,  only  in  thisaCi  it  u  meer 
recipient.' 

Sir^   I  have  not  time,  nor  paper  to  anfwer  thofe  many  quefti- 
ons,  the  moft  of  which  I  conceive  impertinent  to  this  bufinefs  : 
and  your  Explication  of  your  felf,  how  imperfections  incur 
Gracei^are  done  away^and  yet  the  conditions  of  righteoufnefstis 
to  me  mpj.Jc'^-Ta.roy :  but  I  cannot  go  any  further.  What  I  have 
written  with  much  love  and  refped  to  you ,  I  fliould  account 
it  a  great  mercy  to  be  inftrlHiental  to  bring  you  to  the  right 
way  again;  If  there.be  fo  much  Joy  for  reducing  a  wandring 
(hecp.be  not  offended  if  I  fay  there  will  be  much  more  for  an  er- 
ring fliepheard  :  though  I  hope  at  laft  your  error  may  prove  in 
words  rather  then  in  fence  ;  with  hcartfy  brotherly  love  I  have 
written  this,  and  fo  let  it  be  received  from  your  fellow-labou- 
rer, who  honours  Gods  gifts  in  yoU)  andisalfo  fenfiblcof  his 
•wn  infirtnities,  and  pronenefs  to  err. 


C 181 ) 


Dc.:,  Siry 

IF  youdoubc  of  the  truth  of  my  bodily  infirmity,  icisbe- 
caufe  you  neither  know  my  body  nor  mind,     "i  he  diTputc 
ac  Btvi>dley,\%  it  was  almoft  at  horrie,  fo  I  had  the  choice  of  the 
time,  and  luchftrengrh  vouchfafed  from  Gcd,  which  I  cannot 
again  expect,  much  lei?  promifc  my  Iclf.  I  told  you  I  iwive  feme 
liicUa  tnterv^i-ijt^  perhaps  a  few  hours  in  a  moneth  .•  but  if  up- 
on fuch  uncertainty!  fhould  draw  you  to  a  journey,  and  then 
ten  to  one  fail  you,  I  fhould  be  injnriou?.     But  feeing  you  fo 
far  and  freely  condifcend,  if  God  wil  Oicw  me  fo  much  Mercy, 
as  to  enable  this  reftlef?  uncedan'ly-piined  i'cf/^f<?;j  to  fuchja 
work,  I  fhall  heboid  to  fend  you  word,  and  claim  the  favour 
you  offer.     In  the  mean  time  it  is  my  duty  to  let^ou  know,  I 
have  received  your  Letter,  and  to  return  you  hearty  thanks  for 
it,  though  it  be  not  that  which  I  hoped  for,  and  (liall  now  ceafe 
CO  expect.    I  am  convinced  now  as  we^  as  you  Ihat  Letters  are 
but  a  lofsof  time:  but  your  Arguments  or  dired  anfwers  to 
my  Queftions,  would  have  been  for  my  advantage,  a  precious 
improvement  of  it  :  but  feeing  I  may  nor  be  (o  happy,  I  muft 
reft  content,    Itftillfccmeth  tomy  weak  underftandmg  to  be 
no  impertinency  to  prove  that  your  felf  affirm  Repentance, 
Confefsion,Turning,Forgiveing  others,  c^f,  co  be  more  then 
figns,  i.e.  to  be  conditions  to  qualifie  the  Subject  to  obtain 
forgivenefs ;  and  to  tell  you  that  I  fay  no  more,  and  to  tell  you 
ftill,  that  you  give  more  to  faith  (  and  fo  to  man  )  then  I  ;  but  I 
give  no  more  to  works  for  ought  I  defcern  then  you  •  lam  fure 
then  our  ordinary  Divines  do  :  And  if  I  do  miftake  herein,  you 
have  little  reafon  to  fufpeci  me  of  willfulnefs ;  though  of  weak- 
nefs  as  much  as  you  pleafe.     As  for  the  ftatc  of  the  Qucttion 
between  us,  which  you  fpcak  of,  lama  ftranger  to  it ,  and 
know  not  what  you  mean. I  never  came  to  the  (hcmg  of  a  Qoe- 
ftion  with  you  ;  nor  did  you  ftite  any  to  me  in  your  letters,  but 
mentioned  your  vehement  diflfent  from  feveral  paffagcsinmy 
book^and  therefore  I  had  reafon  to  think  that  you  fell  upon  the 
Queftions  as  there  they  were  ftated  ;  fo  that  it  is  intime  c-rme- 
dHllitu/f  pertinent  to  my  queftion,which  is  impertinent  to  yours. 

Aa  3  You 


Ci8i) 


You  fay  tlie  queftion  is ,  [_fVhetfier  the  Gofpel  righteoufntfs  be 
macleourj  otherwise  thc/t  b)  believing  ?  ]  and  cell  rae  that  I  fay 
\_  bj  believing  and  obed.er.ce  ~\  when  I  never  Hi  ted  fuch  a  quefti- 
on, nor  ever  give  fuch  an  anfwer.  I  fupp  )fc  by  []  Gofpel  Highte- 
oa/^f/}]  you  mean  Chnfts  Righceoufnefs  given  to  Believers  : 
Now  I  ttave  affirmed  that ;  tkofe  only  //ja.'l  buve  part  in  /"/?»'//?/ 
falisfailion-,  and  jo  m  him  be  legally  n^ktcKiS  ,  who  do  believe  and 
obey  the  Qoffel-,  andjo  are  in  thtmfclvt's  EvarigeliCAlly  righteous.  ] 
But  your  phrafe  [w^a'^o^rj^^  doth  intimate  that  our  fi'lt  poflqf- 
fion  of  C  hriftsRighreoufnefs  (hould  be  upon  Obedience  as 
well  as  Faith  ;  which  I  never  affirmed  ;  But  Chrifts  Righteouf- 
nefs  is cc«;M«fi/ ours  on  condition  of  obeying  him,  though  not 
mude  omhio  :  and  we  (hall  bejuftifie^at  ludgementalfo  on 
that  condition.  As  it  is  not  marriage  duty,  but  LontrafI  which 
is  the  condition  of  awomansfirft  Intereftinher  Husband  and 
his  riches-,  but  marriage  duty  and  the  performance  of  that  Co- 
venant, is  the  condition  of  her  Intereft  as  continued.  And  in- 
deed it  is  much  of  my  care  in  that  Book  to  (hun  and  avoid  that 
queftion  which  youfay^s  flatcd  between  us:  for  I  knew  how 
much  ambiguity  is  in  the  Word  \  By  ~\  which  I  was  loch  to 
play  with.  I  know  we  arejuflified  By  God  the  Father,  By 
Chriftsfatisfadion,  By  Chrifts  abfolution,  By  the  Cofpel  Co- 
venant or  Promife,  By  the  Sacraments,  By  Faith,  By  Works  ^ 
^for  ]  will  never  be  alhamed  to  fpeak  the  words  of  the  Holy 
Ghoft  )  By  our  words  (  for  fo  fairh  Chrift  )  Therefore  if  you 
will  needs  maintain  in  general,  that  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  is 
made  ours^  no  otherwifc  then  by  beleiving,  nor  otherwife  cc^nti- 
nued  ours ;  you  fee  how  much  you  muft  exclude.  But  to  remyjve 
fuch  Ambiguity,  I  diftinguifh  between  juftifying  [^  ^;r  ]as  an 
efficient  inftrumental  Caufc,  and  [  1iy~\di%hy  ^  condition  •.  and  I 
{lill  affirm  that  Works  or  Obedience  do  never  juftifieasany 
caafe,  much  lefs  fuch  a  caufe  ^  but  that  by  them  as  by  a  condition 
appointed  by  the  free  Lawgiver  and  Juftifier  we  are  finally  jufti- 
fied.  And  truly  Sir,  it  is  paft  my  reach-at  prefent  to  underftand 
what  you  fay  lefs  in  this  then.l,€xcepc  you  differ  only  about  the 
word  [By'\^  and  not  the  fence  ;  and  think  that  it  is  improper 
to  fay  that  Pardon  or  Juftification  is  ^y  that  which  is^but  a 
condition;  You  feern  here  Co  drive  all  at  this,  and  yet  me  thinks 

you 


C'83) 


yon  fhould  nor.     t  .   Eciauie  you  affirm  your  felf,  that  conrfi- 
cioiij  have  a  moral  efficiency  ;  and  then  it  iccms  when  you /ay 
RcpenCiiiicc,  Confclijon,    c^c.  aie  conditions,  you  mean  tlicy 
are  morally  efficient ;  which  is  a  giving  more  to  wot  ks  then  ever 
i  did.     2.  becj.ufe  you  know  it  is  the  phrafc  of  ».  hriltand  his 
Spirit,  that  we  are  juliified^y  our  words  c^nd  works  ;  and  it 
is  fate  fpea king  in  Scripture  phrafe."  5.  Becaufe  you  (ay  after' 
that  my  Aflertions  are  detirudive  of  what  Divmes  deliver  ;  but 
the  word  5v,if  we  are  agreed  in  the  fence,  cannot  be  deftru- 
dive  ;  and  except  tlie  phrafc  onl)  B)\  c^c.  be  the  difference, 
where  is  it?  Whcnyou  fay  Repentance,  c^c.     arc  conditions, 
and  I  fay  they  are  no  more  :  and  I  have  nothing  from  you  of 
any  diHigrcement  about  the  fence  of  the  word  coKclitioK.L^i\  you 
flioulddoubt  of  my  meanmg  in  that,  1  underiUnd  it  cs  in  our 
ufuaj  fpecch  it  is  taken,  and  as.Lawyers  and  D: vines  genernJly 
do,  viz.  £fi  Lex  addita  nfgotio^  tjua  dcncc^rx(}ctnr^evcniiim  [uf- 
peKciit.      J*et  ell  modK6^  vel  cauj.i  qua  fufpndit  id  <;nod  agilnr^ 
i^tioad  ex  pofi  fallo  cct7fimstur,ut  Cujstctus.  And  whereasCondi- 
cionsare  ufually  6.\K\t\g\i WM.\mo lot tjiativ as ^c. a-' ^det  d^  mixta/^ 
feu  communefj.  mean  condttlonts,  potejl^tiva^.     Where  you  add 
that  you  fay  onl/  fai;h  is  the  condition  juftifyirg.  r^c.  but  I 
make  a  juftitying  Repenrance,  &c.     And  whereas  heretofore 
tvehad  only  juftifying  fatth,  nowc^f.  ]]  I  arvlwer  ,    i.  If  by 
juftifying  Repentance,  &c.  you  mean  ih?.t  which  is  (  as   you 
lay  Faith  is )  an  inftrument  or  efficient  Caufe,  I  never  dreamed 
of  any  fuch  .•  If  as  a  Condition  ;  you  confefiit  your  felf-  2.  If 
you  fpeakagainft  the  fercc,  we  are  agreed  in  that  for  ought  I 
know  t  If  againit  the  phrafe,  then  jul^ifying  Faith  or  Repen- 
tance is  no  Scripture  phrafe  :  but  to  be  jufti.^iedBy  faith,  and  By 
works,  and  By  words,are  all  Scripture  phrafes.      You  lay.  jon 
firmly  hold  that  Repentance  andcthf^  Exercifss  of  Grace  are  an- 
tecedent ^ualifcatiofiSy  and  mcd\2i  ord'maZHfinthc  ufe  whereof  cr.lf 
Pardon  cat*  he  hsd  :  hut  VV/?4f  is  thi6  to  bte  ?Sic.  I  anrwer.  i .  Add 
conditions  as  you  do  in  your  Book,  and  you  Lti:  ;,$  much  as  I. 
z.  If  by  the  other  exercifes  of  Grace  you  mean  the  particulars 
in  your  book  enumerated,  or  the  like  ;  and  if  by  Fardony\ou 
mean  even  the  firftpar(fon^  as  the  word  0«/^  fhews  you  do) 
ihcn  yoo  go  ^uite  beyond  me,  and  give  far  more  to  thufe  exer- 
cifes 


C'8+) 


cifes  of  grace  then  I  dare  do.  For  I  fay  that  Chrift  and  all  his  im- 
pu'ed  R  ghteoufnefs,  is  mide  ours,and  wc  pardoned  and  jufti- 
ried  at  firft  wUhout  any  works  or  obedience  more  then  bare 
faith,  f  and  what  is  precedent  in  its  place  or  concomitant)  and 
that  bona  opera  feejuunthr  jujlificatum  not*  prxcedunt  ju^ifican' 
dttrnt  inregardof  our  firft  juftirtcation.  I  dare  not  fay,  they 
are  Antecedents  or  mrdU  ardinata.Whcrt  you  add^^hat  is  tkat 
to  yon  that  m^ke  the  ri7hteo}4fr,efs  of  the  C^ver.^nt  nf  grace  to  be 
maJe  ours  upon  our goly  working.  &c.  I  anfi^-er,  i .  I  have  (hewed 
it  is  as  much  as  I  fay, if  not  mor^^upon'  intending  but  a  condition 
or  mtdium  oriinatum.  2.1  never  (aid  what  you  lay  I  maintain  in 
phrafc  or  fenfefifthe  wo\d{_mude^^  intend  either  efficiency  or  any 
caufality,  or  the  firft  polfeffion  of  R  ghteoufnefs.  3.  You 
much  ufe  the  harfti  phraJe  of  ^orkjng]  as  here  [Jjodlj  wor  kjfjg  J 
as  mine ;  which  I  doubt  whether  ever  I  uttered  or  afed  ;  And 
the  term  ftt'fyrj^i]  I  mtleufe,  but  in  the  explication  of  f^mes. 
For  I  told  you  that  I  disclaim  works  in  PuhIj  fenfe ,  Rom.  4. 4. 
which  make  the  reward  not  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  You  add 
^if  therefore  yoaMad  fpeni  your  felf  to  Pjevf  that  faith  hath  no  pf 
culiar  in(irt4mentaHtj  in  our  jupi fixation  but  Vfhat  ether  gracts 
h<*ve^  then  jo»  had  hit  the  mark^,'\  AnfxV.  I  COnfefs  Sir  you 
now  come  to  the  point  in  difference.  But  do  you  not  hereby 
conf«fs  that  I  give  no  more  to  works  then  you,  but  only  lefs  to 
faith?  Why  then  do  you  ftill  harp  upon  the  word  \_n>orks'^ 
as  if  I  did  give  more  to  them }  the  task  you  now  fet  me  is  to  prove 
that  faith  doth  no  more,  and  not  that  works  do  fo  much  :  That 
faith  is  not  an  inflrument,  and  not  that  love  or  obedience  are 
conditions.  A  nd  to  this  I  anfwer  you  :  i .  I  have  in  my  book 
faid  fomewhat  to  prove  faith  no  inflrument  of  juftifying,  and 
you  faid  nothing  againft  it.  Why  then  fhould  I  aim  at  this 
mark  ?  2.  1  think  I  have  proved  there  that  faith  juflifieth  pri- 
marily and  properly  as  the  condition  of  the  Covenant,  and  but 
remotely  as  A  receiving  ji^flifca'-.on^  this  which  you  call  the  in- 
ftrumcntality,  beingbucthe  very  formal  nature  of  the  ad,  and 
ioihc  cju,j  final  eri  a  ox  \i^  aptitude  to  the  office  of  Juftifying. 
And  becaufe  1  build  much  on  this  fuppofition,  I  put  it  in  the 
4^»fn>/,which  you  judge  impertinent.  3.  Yet  if  you  willun- 
derftard  the  word  in/lrnnuMt  laxely ,   I  have  not  any  where 

dcnyed 


dcnycd  faith  to  have  fdch  an  Inftrumentality  ('that  is,'  receiving 
orapprcherfivenefs)  above  other  graces:    Only  1  deny  and 
moft  C9tffidtnelj  deny  that  that  is  the  formal,  proper  or  ncereft 
cauTe  of  faith's  juflifying:     But  the  formal  reafon  is,  bccaufe 
God  hath  made  it  the  condition  of  the  Covenant,  promifing 
juftificationto  fuch  receiving,  which  elfe  would- have  no  more 
juftified  then  any  other  aft  :     And  therefore  fo  far  as  others 
are  made  conditions,  and  thepronaife  to  usonthcm,'  theymuft 
rccdis  have  fome  fuch  ufe  as  well  as  faith :    And  that  they  are 
conditions,  ycuconfcfs  as  much  as  I.     4.    But  what  if  I  be 
miflaken  in  this  point  ?   what  is  the  danger  ?     If  faith  fliould 
deferve  the  name  of  an  inftrument,  when  I  think  it  is  but  a  con- 
dition ?    I.  Is  it  any  danger  to  give  lefs  to  faith  then  others, 
whilelgivenolefstoChrift?    (For  ifyourtiould  think  I  gave 
lefs  to  Chrift  then  others,  I  fhouid  provoke  you  agiin  and 
again  to  (hew  wherein  )   2. 1  dery  nothing  that  Scripture  faith  : 
It  faith  not  that  faith  is  an  inftrument  :     (perhaps  you  will  tell 
me  Vtronius  argues  thus .-     But  I  mean  it  is  neither  in  the  letter 
nor  plain  fenfe-    and  then  I  care  not  who  fpeaks  it,  if  true.) 
:?.  You  make  man  an  efficient  caufe  of  juftifyinghimfelf.    ("For 
the  inftrument  is  an  efficient  caufe)  :    And  what  if  I  dare  npt 
give  fo  much  to  man  ?    is  there  any  danger  in  it  ?    or  fhoult!  I 
be  fpoke  againft  for  the  Dodrine  of  obedience ,   as  »/  /  gave 
wor*  to  man  then  you,  when  I  give  fo  much  lefs?     4.  thofe 
that  dident  from  me  do  make  the  very  natural  a(S  of  faith.whfch 
ismoftcflcntiaitoit,  andinfcparablefrom  it,  as  it  from  it  feJf; 
z//«.  Its  afprthtnfton  of  Chnjls  Righttoufntfj^  to  be  the  proper 
primary  reafon  of  its  juftifying.     What  if  I  dare  not  do  fo ,  but 
give  that  glory  to  God,  and  not  to  the  nature  ofour  own  ad  ? 
and  fay,  that  P-Jes  tjuct  recipit   Jufiijlcat^  fed  nonqua   recipit 
primarily,  but  as  it  is  the  condition  which  the  free  juftifier  hath 
conferred  this  honour  upon?   is  there  any  danger  in  this .?   and 
will  I  here   be  joy  in  heaven  for  reducing  a  man  from  fuch  an 
opinion  ? 
You  (&y,£fVhat  more  ihvious  then  that  there  are  many  conditions 
in  juftificato,  vehichare  not  in  aftu  juftificationis  .•  <  Thefafining 
the  head  to  the  bociy^  &c.  ]    Anfw.  i.  -You  faid  .before  that 
they  are  Antecedents  &  LMedia  ordinata^   and  then  they  are 

Bb  fare 


Ci8d;   , 


fore  conditions  »«;«y?»,'?cWtf  as  well  as  »;3j«/?i^c4r<?.    a.  Your 
mention  of  the  condition  in  homlnevicttnte  is  beftdes  our  bufi- 
neff,    and  is  only  of  a    natural  condition ,   or    qualificauon 
in  genere  n.itura;  When  wc  are  fpeaking  only  of  an  adive  con- 
dition m  j^fwfr^  r«flr»/ :     The  former  is  improperly,  the  later 
pioperly  calLd  a  condition.      3..  If  this  be  your  meaning,  I 
confefs  there  are  many  natural  or  paftive  qualifications  ne- 
ceffary,  which  arenoadiveor  proper  moral  conditions  in  a 
L aw- fc nfe  ;     But  this  is  nothing  to  the  matter.    4.  The  phra- 
fes  of  [Condilhis  inju/i-ficato^  ^  in  a^irt  jiijltjicationis^  are  am- 
biguous, and  in  the  Moral  fenfe  improper.     Our  qaeftion  is 
whether  they  are  conditions   ad  ju/itficatio»em  recipiendam  : 
Whic'.i  yet  in  regard  of  time  arc  i>i  u^h  jufii^catiouu^hu:  noicon- 
ditiones  vel  cj:tAlif^cAiioms  if  fins  aUn: .    And  if  you  did  not  think 
thit  repentance  is  a  condition  ai]ti(iifca'ionein  recipiendum^  and 
io  inatitiJHftificjitionis^  how  can  you  fay    it  is  meMum  ordina- 
turn  ?    A  med\Hm;\%  fuchjefTentially  hath  forac  tendency  or  con- 
duciblcnefs  toits  end.     s.  As  obvious  therefore  as  you  think 
this  is,  it  is  paft  the  reach  of  my  dull  apprehcnfion  to  conceive  of 
your  conditions  in  a  judiciary  fenfe,  which  are  in  jsffiificato  for 
the  obtaining  of  jaftification,and  not  be  both  adadwn  &ina^tt 
jit(}ificationij :   for  I  fuppofe  you  are  more  accurate  and  ferious 
then  by  the  word  condition  to  mean  modum  vel  ajfeSiionem  entu 
Aletaphyjicatt ,    vel  fihjeSli  alicujm  adjunUunt  vel  tjualificati' 
onem  infenfo  Plojfico.,  when  we  are  fpeaking  only  of  conditions 
infenpuforenji.    And  there  arc  many  thoufand  honeft  ChriQi- 
ans  as  dull  as  Ijand  therefore  I  do  not  think  it  can  be  any  weigh- 
ty point  of  faith  which  muft  be  fupportcd  by  fuch   fubtikies 
which  arc  paft  our  rcacb,though  obvious  to  yours :  Godufeth 
not  to  hang  mens  falvacion  on  fuch  School  diltmdions  which 
fewmencanunderftand.     6.  And  every  fuch  Tyro  in  Philofo- 
phy  as  I, cannot  reach  your  Phylofopbical  fubtilty  neither  •    to 
un  ^erftand  that  tbe  faftning  of  the  head  to  the  body  is  not  condi- 
tio  in  aFlu  videntis  \  ('though  ic  be  nothing  to  our  purpofe  ); 
Indecdwema^  think  it  of  more  remote  ufe  then  fome  other, 
and  but  propter  a li-4d,  ejr  qaafi  conditio  ccnntionis  ;    and  if  you 
fay  fo  of  Repentance,  &c.  wefhould  nor  difagr'ee- 

You  fay  Q/«  othir  things  I  come  cff^  andfo  wollifie  m)  fl^erti- 

ons 


r 


C1S7) 


o»s,tbat  yopt  Meed  not  co»teyi4]  Anfw.  i.  I  would  you  bad  told 
me  wherein  I  fo  come  off  :  For  I  know  not  of  a  word.  If 
you  mean  in  that  I  now  Tay  obedience  isno  condition  of  our  firft 
attaining  juftiHcation,  but  only  of  the  continuance  of  it,  ^c. 
I  faid  the  fame  over  and  over  in  my  book,  and  left  it  (hould  be 
•vcr-lookt,  ■  I  put  it  in  the  Index  of  diftindions.  l(  you  mean 
-^otthis,  I  know  not  what  you  mean.  2.  But  if  explication  of 
ny  felf  will  fo  mollifie  and  prevent  contending,  I  fhall  be  glad 
to  explain  my  felf  yet  further :  Yea,  and  heartily  to  recanc 
where  Ifce  my  error.  For  that  which  you  defire  ,  /  defnon- 
f^rate  that  its  By  lave  ,  and  Tl rough  love  ^  O'C-  I  have  an- 
Iwered  before  by  diftinguiQiing  cf  the  fenfe  of  B)i  and 
Through:  and  in  my  fenfe  I  have  brought  you  forty  plain  Texts 

j^  in  ray  book  for  proof  of  it ,  which  fhcw  it  is  no  new  Do- 
Arine. 

To  your  argument  from  Rom.  4.  Where  you  fay  that  AbrA- 
hams  jyfiificAtion  is  the  pattern  of  all  others^  I  conceive  that  an 
uncouth  fpcech  ,  ftrange  to  Scripture  for  phrafe  and  proper* 
fenfe,  though  in  a  large  fenfe  tolerable  and  true  ;  Certain  I 
am  that  /'^i^/ brings  *y4l>rabams  example  to  prove  that  we  arc 
juftifiedby  faith  wi^tout-the  works  of  the  Law  J  but  as  certain 
that  our  faith  muft  differ  from  ^-^brahams^  even  in  the  cfTenti- 
ah  of  it :  We'muft  believe  that  this  J  ejus  is  he,  or  we  Jhall  Ajt 
in  our  fins  ^  which  Abraham  was  not  required  to  believe.  Our 
faithisanexplicite  Affentand  Confent  to  the  Mediators  Of- 
fices, riz.  that  he  be  our  I-ord  and  Saviour,  and  a  Covenant- 
ing with  him,  and  giving  up  our  felvesto^im  accordingly  :  But 
vihzihtT  Abrahams  C and  all  recited  in  f/«^.  w.)  were  fuch,  is 
queftionible.  Too  much  looking  on  Abraham  as  a  pattern, 
fceros  to  be  it  that  occafioned  Qrotius  r 0  give  that  wretched  de- 
finition of  faith,  (  AtiMct.  in  /o<r.)that  [_^itis  but  a  bi^h  efiimatioa 

V  of  Gods  font  sr  and  ivifjom,  anifaithfalnefs  i^i  keeping^  h^s  fromi- 
fii,  &c.  ~\  (yet  I  know  be  came  (hort  alfo  of  dclcribing  that 
faith  which  he  lookt  on  as  the  pattern.) 

My  firft  anfvver  was  that  I  exclude  alfo  4ti}tjf-:Stive  co  opera* 

'  tioM  ;  to  which  you  fay,  [fFhy  d»yveftrive  ahout  rvordt,  &c.]     I 

feetbat  mens  concevings  are  fo  various,  that  there  is  no  hopes 

that  we  fhoul  J  be  in  aH  things  of  one  mind.  Becaufc  1  was  loth 

13  b  2  to 


(r88 


to  ftrlve  about  words,  therefore  I  diftinguillied  between  cAufA' 
litjfi  and  conditiofj4/it/y  knowlnj^  :hat  the  word  "^z  was  ambigu- 
ous(when  wcarefaid  to  be  juftified  By  faich.^r.j now  you  take 
this  diftinguiftiing  to  be  driving  about  words,  to  avoid  which, 
you    Would  bring  we    back  to  the  amSiguou?  term  again. 
Whereas  I  cannot  but  be  moft  confident,  that  as  guile  ismoft  in* 
Generals  ,    lo  there  would  be  nothing  elfe  between  us  but 
ftriving   about  words,    if  we  diTpate    on  an   unexplained 
ter-n^  and  without  diftindiion.    Do  you  indeed  think  ,   that 
to  bean  efficientciufeof  our  jufttfication,    and  to  be  a  bare 
condition,  is  all  one  ?    or  do  you  think  the  difference  to^  be  of 
no  moment?  You  fay,  ^doMotexciade  \'vorkjjufiifjfi»g  at  well 
ai  faith ^  let  the  exprejp,jns  be  wb.it  they  rvitU\    t^nfw.    i.  You 
ftiould  have  faid,  \^Ltt  the  fenfe^    or^Ajofy4Jitf)ingbeyphfHit 
w//,  ]  for  furc  the  difference  between  an  cmcient  caufe  and  a 
condition  is  more  then  in  the  exprefllion,  or  clfe  I  have  been  long, 
miftaken.     2.  I  do  not  exclude  G't7j;«7?//^t«j^,  Chrifh  jafUfyiug^ 
ihefVjrdjvflifyingt  &c.^ni  yet  to  diftingui(h  between  the  way 
Ehat  tbefe  juftifie  in,  and  the  way  in  which  faith  juftifi^s,  I  take 
to  be  no  ftriving  about  words,  but  of  as  high  concernment  as 
my  falvation  is  worth.     3.  Either  you  raiflike  my  phrafe,  or  my 
/*«/<?:    ifthc/>J&r<«/<?,  then  you  mifiik^  the  w«>r^  ^/-^cji^,  which 
faith,  a  man  is  jftjiifiedbyworkj  andntt  by  faith  on/y  ;     If  the 
fe»fe,  then  you  (hould  nOtfali  upon  the /j^r^r/r  :.    and  then  to 
diftinguifh  and  explain,   is  not  to  ftrive  about  words-     4.  If 
I  do  bring  fa'th  and  obedience  neerer  in  juftiiication  then  others, 
it  js  not  by  giving  Wi?r*r(7B»(?n^f  then  o:hers,  but  by  giving  left 
to  fAith  i  And  if  in  that  I  err,  you  (hould  have  fallen  on  that  and 
(hewed  it,  and  not  fpeak  ftill  as  if  I  gave  more  to  works  then 
you.    lamfurelgive  lefstomtn,  and  therefore  ««/f/}  then  you 
to  Chrifi.  I  perceive  not  the  leaft  difadvantage  herein  that  I 
lye  open  tO)  butonl/the  oit««  of  the  phrafe  o^JH/fifi^^tioK  by 
^o^fy   with  m«nthat  are  carried  by  prejudice  and  cuftome. 
5^  I  willnot  quarrel  about  fuchaword^   but  I  like  not  your 
^hr»{c  of  [Faith  ju/lify'iKg,  and rvarkfjftfiifj'mg,]  for  it  is  fitter 
Kointroduce  the  conceit  of  an  efficiency  in  them,  then  to  fiiy, 
\jVeareji4^^ifedby  faith  and  by  Works~\  which  are  only  theScrip- 

cure^phcafe,  and  OgniHe  but  a  conditionality. 

To, 


-      •    («89). 

To  that  you  fay  oat  of  Thil.  3.9.     I  believe  Paul  dot^i 
fDoft  sppofitely  oppofe  the  righteoufnefs  which  is  by  faith  to 
'that  whichisby  the  Law.     But  then  i.   He  mtani  not  [By 
faith  as  an  inftrumencof  fiftification]  2.  Nor  by  faith  which  is 
but  ameer  affiance  on  Chrift  for  juftification,  oi"  only  as  fuch- 
g.  Nor  doth  he   exclude  Knowledge,  Repentance,  Obedience* 
^c.     4.  But  to  fay  that  righteoufnefs  or  juftification  \si>j  love, 
or  l>yohedUfice^  &c.     Without  adding  any  more,  is  not  a  con- 
venient fpeech,  as  it  is  to  fay  that  righteoufnefs  is  by  faith. 
I .  Bccaufe  the  fpeech  feems  to  be  of  the  firft  receiving  of  righ- 
teoufnefs, wherein  obedience  or  works  have  no  hand.     2,  Be- 
caufc  faith  having  moft  dear  dired  relation  to  Chrift,  doth  moft 
plainly  point  out  our  righteoufnefs  to  be  in  bim.  5.  Becaufe  faith 
as  it  is  taken  in  the  Gofpel,  is  a  moft  comprehcnfive  grace,  con- 
taining many  ads ,    and  implying  or  including  many  others 
which  relate  to  Chrift  as  the  objed  aifo.     Even  obedience  to 
Chrift  is  implyed  as  a  neceflfary  fubfcquent  part  of  the  conditi- 
on,   feeing  faith  is  an  accepting  of  Cfirift  as  Lord  and  King,  and 
Head,  and  Husband,  as  wcllasa  juftifier.  5.  Yet  Scripture  faith 
as  well  as  I,  that  Chrift  (hall  juftifie  us  Bj  his  knowledge^  and  we 
thai!  be  jftjiified  hj  our  vforAs^  and  by  workj  j,  afid  me  thinks  it 
fhould  be  no  fin  to  fpeak  the  words  of  God  ,  except  it  be  (hew- 
ed that  I  mifunderftand  them.    It  is  not  fo  fit  a  phrafe,   to  fay , 
that  a  poor  ignoble  \^oman,  was  made  rich  and  honorable  by 
her  Love,  or  Obcdien(!e,or  Marriage,  faithfulnefsjand  conju- 
gal aftions,  as  to  fay,  it  was  by  marriage  with  fuch  a  Noble 
man,   or  confent  to  take  him  to  be  hfr  husband  :     For  the 
marriage  confent  and   Covenant   doth  imply  conjugal  affe- 
dion,  afiion  and  faithfulnefs.  Yetaretheielaftas  flat  conditi- 
ons of  her  continuing  her  enjoyments  as  the  marriage  Covenant, 
was  of  firft  obtaining  them. 

To  my  fecond  Anfwer ,  you  (hew  thit  Paul  excludes 
works  under  any  notion,  i.  From  his  oppofition  between 
faith  and  works,  where  you  fay  1  contradidP/»«/^  and  give 
a  tertium.  To  which  I  anfwer,  to  diitinguifh  of  Pauls  terras,  and 
explain  hs  meaning  in  his  own  words  is  not  to  give  a  tcrtittm^ 
or  contradid ;  but  this  is  all  that  I  do.I  diftnguifti  of  the  word 
}79rks  i  fomecime  it  is  taken  more  largely  for  AUs  cr  A^ions^ 

B  b  3  and 


(ipo) 


and  fo  famejtikti  it ;  fomctiraes  more  ftriftly  for  only  fuch 
ASl'ons  a-i  a  LxhoHrerfe>formeth  for  his  fy.ij^es,  Or  wh'ch  make 
the  Rc\\\i^dtohenot  of  L/race,  but  of  debt.  So  Paul  tells  you  that 
he  underftandeth  or  ufcth  the  tcrna^  Rom.  4.4.  ufuilly  there- 
fore cilling  them  (^i?rJ^/  of  the  Ltw.  Now  he  th.n  excludes 
Works  only  under  tbis  notion,  doch  not  therefore  exclude  them 
under  ever^'  notion.  Wiierc  you  add  that  Pauls  oppofition  it 
het\'>feeKF<4i:h  i<n.^Ayiythirgof  ours'.  I  anfwcr,  I.  Is  not  Faith 
ouy-s  as  much  as  Lore,  &c}  a.  Arsno^  Knorvleige^  Words  ^ 
rVorks,o(irs,  by  all  which  God  f:iit.h,  we  are  ju-  ified?  ^.  There 
is  no  fuch  "scripture  where  r^u/  m'kes  any  iuch  o  pofuion;  buc 
only  he  renouncerh  h  s  own  Righteoufnefs  which  is  of  the  Law, 
Phi/.  3.  8,9  and  any  thing  of  ourcwn  that  may  be  called 
ff^orks  in  the  ftrider  fence. 

Your  fecond  is,  becattfe  Paul  excludes  Pihrd\\2m^^orks^&c. 
Anfwer.    i.  You  mske  my  tertium  ro  be  [  works  thut  are  of 
Gra<e'^  and  here  again,  works  that  flow  from  Cjrace    and  fay, 
Abrahams  ne^enot  bj  meerfirengthoj  the  La\r  :      But  trefe  are 
no  words  of  mine  ;  nor  is  it  candid  to  ft'gn  them  to  be  mine  ^ 
but  that  I  impute  it  to  your  hafte  :  I  beUeveyou  remembred  fo 
well  the  words  of  ^noiradttis,  Bdlarwine  ^  and  orher  Papifts, 
that  they  drop'pcd  frcin  your  pen  in  hafte  in  Read  of  mine;  nor 
is  my  fence  any  whit  like  rhcirs;  for  I  fpeik  not  of  the  effi- 
cient caufe  of  works,  (Nature  or  Grace  )^  nor  the  meer  com- 
mand requiring thcm^when  I  fpeak  of  I^avv  and  Gofpel:     but 
the  full  entire  Covenant  or  Law  confifting  of  all  its  parts,  and 
fo  making  our  Ads  the  conditions  of  the  Puniflimcn*  or  Re- 
ward :  as  I  have  opened  over  and  over  in  my  Bock.    2.  You 
ask,  iVtre  Abrahams  Works  in  ojp  fitinn  to  thit^  ■  &c  ?  Anfwer. 
I.  ^<i«/ excludes  alfo  works  in  co-ordination  with  Chrift,and  fo 
do  L     ^.  Yea  arsd  works  fuppofed  to  be  fubordinate  to  Chrift, 
which  arc  not  capable  of  a  real  fubordination,  3.  but  notfqdl 
as  are  truly  fubordinate,  from  being  fuch  conditions  as  is  hef=^ 
faid.  4  You  fe'cm  to  me  to  n-iftake  /'r?K/much,as  if  he  took  it  for 
granted,  that  y}brahr,m  had   fuch  works  which  P<?a/ difputeth 
sgainft,  buc  could  not  be  juftified  by  them  :  Whereas  I  doubt 
aottofay,  that 'PWcontrarily  fuppofeth  thSiZ  iy^braham  had 
aofuch  Works,  f  which  m.ake  the  reward  to  be  of  Debt,  and 

not 


not  of  Grace  )  and  therefore  eould  not  be  juftified  by  them. 

Your  third  Arcument  is,    [_  banuft  im^tit'xng,  coverUcr^  all  is 
wholly  attrihnteWto  Cod.  ]     AnjWer,  1  doubt  not  but  th'at  God 
is  the  only'Principal  efficient  Caufe,  and  his  Promife  or  Cove- 
nant the  Inftrumental ;  therefore!  cannot  think  as  others,  that 
man  is  the  efficient  Inftrumental  by  behevmg,  or  that  Faith  is 
fuch ;  But  what'  Is  all  therefore  atcribuced  to  God  ?   Even 
the  performance  of  the  Condicions  on  mans  part?     Or  are 
there  no  fuch  conditions  which  man  muft  perform  himfelf  or 
perifti?  God  only  covereth  fin,  imputech  R'ghreoufnefs,    drc. 
buttonone  who  have  no:  performed  the  Conditions.  Is  Belie- 
ving attributed  to  God,  or  is  it  an  a'ft  of  man  ?  Or  is  it  excJu- 
dcdPWhen  wiilvpu  prove  theConfequenceof  this  Argument  ? 
Your  fifth  Argument  is,  [becaufethe  9>^ffertio»u  ttnivtrfd 
without  workt  in  gegtral  ]    Anf^tr,   I.   Doth  not  the  Apdftle 
contradift  you  by  expounding  himfeff  in  the  very  next  verfe 
before  thofe  j  ou  cite  ?   Rom.^.  4.   That  by  works  he  means  not 
fimply^W  ^-^Uions^  as  J^imes  doth,  but  fuch  as  make  the   re- 
ward to  be  of  deb:  and  not  of  Grace  ?   Indeed  fuch  works  are 
univerfaliy  excluded.  2.  Therefore  he  excludes  the  wayprefence 
of  works,  and  faith,  ro  ;{?;>«  ribdrWorj^f/^«o;,  Sic.vtr.  5.  But  the 
prefer,cio{  good  aftions  you  fay  is  not  excluded. 

Your  laft  Argument  feems  tome  the  fame  with  the  fourth, 
and  it  forceth  me  to  admire  that  youftiould  think  theconfe- 
(juence  good.  Blejfa^nefs  u  when  fin  u  forgiven  •,  therefore  no  ^orl^ 
or  good  aEI  performed  bj  man  is  the  condition  of  fcrgtvenefsy  either 
a^  begun  or  conttnued^  crcoitft4mrrate~\    If  this  be  not  your  con- 
fequence,    you  fay  nothing  againft  me  :  if  it  be,  I  afTure  you  it 
is  not  in  my  Power  to  believe  it, nor  to  difcern  the  leaft  fhaddow 
of  probability  of  truth  in  it,  nor  to  free  ic  from  the  charge  of 
being  the  groffeft  An:inomianifm  (  ft  pace  tui  iia  dicam. )  And 
here  I  muft  needs  tell  you  alfo  my  utter  difability'to  reconcile 
you  with  your  felf ;  for  you  before  fay,they  are  r^edia  ordinatat 
and  here  you  {^y^They  are  fxclnJ.ed  under  any  notion  x  As  if 
to  be  a  medium  were  no  notion  \  or  the  medium  did  nothing  in  or 
to  the  very  juftifying  of  the  perfan.  ^ 

To  my  next  A  nfwer.     If  w*.  r\s  be  excluded  under  any  no  'ion, 
then  James  his  Vpords  cannot  be  true^  thAt  \\'e4rfjnfiified  by  works. 

-You 


You  reply,  //  thfre  Ifc  jtijlifying  tvorkj^  how  faith  Piul  true  ? 
1  anfwer.  Thisisamoft  evident  Pttitio  principU.  It  is  unde- 
niable that  James  indudeth  works  under  fome^tion  .-  and  that 
Paul  exdudeth  them  under  fome  other  notion  :  nowi  therefore 
1  mjoht  well  ask,  How  faith  James  true  elfe  >.  Becaufe  my  fup- 
pofiuon  cannot  be  denyed  :  But  you  ruppofe  that  Paul  exdu- 
deth works  under  any  notion/  which  is  ^he  very  Queftion,  and 
is  denyed.  )  When  you  ask  how  faith  Paul  true }  Paul  faith  true 
becaufe  he  fpeaks  of  works  ftriftly  taken,a3  is  by  himfelf  explain- 
ed ••  Jamei  could  not  fay  true,  if  works  under  every  notion  (  as 
you  fay  )  be  excluded. 

Next  you  come  to  reconcile  them  by  expounding  Jumes ; 
wh'ere  you  fay.  Faith  )X'hich  in  refpeEl  of  its  AB  ad  intra,  only 
juflifies,  jet  it  \X'orks  ad  extra  :  fades' ^uat  viva^an  qua  viva.  I 
anfwer.  Whats  this  to  the  Qneftion?  The  Queftionijnoc 
whether  Faith  work?  Nor  whether  Faith^juftifie  ?  Nor  what 
Faith  juftifieth  ?  But  in  what  fence  ^tmes  faith,  we  are  juftified 
by  works,  and  not  by  Faith  only  ?  You  anfwer  by  a  direfl  con- 
tradidion  to  fame'^  ('\i  I  can  reach  thefence  of  your  Anfwer^ 
faying,  It  is  hy  Faith  onlj^  and  that  not  atit  liveth^  O'C,  So 
darenotldiredly  fay,  itisnothyworkj^  when  God  faith  itij: 
but  think  I  am  boundtodiftinguifti,  and  (hew  in  what  fence 
works  juftifie,  and  in  what  notjand  not  to  fay  flatly  againft  God, 
that  yce  art  not  ]H^i^tdbj  works  under  any  Kotiony  but  only  by 
the  Faith  which  worketh.  Adenyalof  Gods  Aflcrtions  is  an  ill 
expounding  of  them, 

To  what  you  fay  of  the  judgement  of  the  Orthodox,  [  th.-tt 
they  go  eadem  via  etfinon  eadtmfemita~]  I  anfwer,  you  may  un- 
derftand  your  diftinftionas  youpleale,  but  I  have  fhewed  the 
difference  •  fome  underftand  it  of  juftification  before  God  j 
others  before  men,  c^c.  And  if  ypu  pleafe  to  make  the  way 
wide  enough,  you  may  take  m^  among  the  Orthodox,  that 
go  eadem  via:    if  not,    I  willftand  out  with  7<»wf/. 

When  you  fay  [jhey  exclnde  ^orks  under  any  notion  in  the 
all  cfjufijfication.^j  I  anfwer,  i. Your  felf include  them  as  antece- 
dents and  concomitarti  (though  I  do  nor,^    2.  I  have  (hewed 
before  that  [^inthesct,  ^f.]is  ambiguous.   If  you  mean  [^as 
jS gents  or  Caufes'^  fo  do  I  exclude  .ibem.     If  you  mean  [  at 

conditions 


ns    M 

\ 


C193) 


cOff'Mdans  rt^^aireii hy  the  ner»  L^tiv  to  the  contwuinjr  and  cmfttm- 
mating  oHY  ']Hfii^cM\ofr\  I  havc  (hewed  you  chacDiviaCSsdo 
judge  other  wife, 

Mynextanrwer  was  \IfVcorkj  under  any  votlon  bt  excludti^^ 
then  fuith  it  exclaimed]  You  reply  l.[^ThiM  BelUrmine.,  &c.\ 
An[i9.  I  knew  indeed  that  BelUrmir.e  faith  fo.  But  Sir,  you'f 
fpeak  to  one  that  is  very  neer  Gods  tribunal,  and  therefore  is  re- 
folved  to  look  after  naked  truth,  and  not  to  be  affrighted  from  ic 
by  the  name  either  oi'Bellarmine  or  AntichriJ};Sind  who  is  at  laft 
brought  to  wink  at  prejudice.  I  am  tully  refolved  by  Gods 
grace  to  go  on  in  the  way  of  Codas  he  difcovereth  it  to  me, 
and  not  to  turn  out  of  it  when  'Bellarm'me  Hands  in  it.  Though 
tb€  Divels  believe,  I  will  (by  Gods  help)  believe  too:  and 
not  deny  Chrift,becaufc  the  Divcls  confefs  him.  You  dy^Non 
fetjMttttr^  Iprovfctbe  confequeiice.  If  all  works  (or  ads)  be 
excluded  under  any  notion  whatfoever,  and  if  faith  be  a  work 
craft  then  faith  is  excluded.  Bnt,&c.£r^c,&c.  Bythercafon 
of  your  denya!  I  underftand  nothing  that  you  deny  ,  but  [  that 
faith  is  awork,er  «ct\  which  I  never  heard  denyed  before,  and 
1  hope  never  lliall  do  again.  The  common  anfwcr  to  'BelUr- 
mine  is,  that/^.-r/j  'Ahieh  it  a  worl^^  jftfi-tfieth ,  bt4t  not  as  it  is  a 
WoHi:  Which  anfwcr  I  confefs  to  be  lound,  and  fubrcnbe  to  it. 
But  then  according  CO  that ,  faith  which  is  a  work  juftifieth 
under  fome  notion  (fuppofe  it  were  under  the  notion  of  an  rn- 
ftrument^  though  not  under  the  notio.i  of  a  work.  But  you 
go  another  way,  and  fay,  i.  Faith  is  paj/ive  in  its  iytfirumeM- 
tality^  and  though  to  believe,  he  a  grammatical  action,  its  vcr- 
bum  adivum  ,  yet  its  fbyfice  ^  •r  hufer  pbyjic'e  pa/ftve. 
A  man  by  heliering  doth  not  operari,  but  rccipere.  As  videre, 
audire,jr»  G'-amm^tttal  aUions^  bt^t  phy ficai  »r  nufurai pt-^tons, 
dfC'  Anfwer.  i.  Thcfe  arc  very  iublimc  AfTertions,  quite 
paft  the  re^ch  of  mv  capacity,  and  of  all  theirs  that  I  ufcto 
converfe  with;  and  I  dare  fay  itisnoHercfie  to  deny  then^ 
nor  can  that  point  be  neer  the  foundation  that  ftands  upon  fuch 
props  which  few  men  can  apprehend.  2.  What  if  Faiihwerc 
f*jjive  in  its  ^nflrumtntaltty  ?  Is  it  not  at  all  an  AB  there- 
fore? If  it  be  ;  Then  that  wbicb  is  attex/fl  or  fVcrl^^  is  not 
cxclnded  undtr  the  notion  of  a  pajftve  hflrumtnt  ;   and  fo 

Cc  not 


not  under  eveyy  Motion  (  I  fpeakon  your  grounds.  But) 
becaufe  you  told  me  before  that  I  fhould  have  fpcnt  ray  felf 
againft  this  Inftrumcntality  of  Faith  if  I  would  hit  the  mark ;  I 
Wiil  fpeak  the  more  largely  to  it  now  :  And  i .  Enquire  whether 
vidcre^  audi^e^  be  only  Grammatical  Adions  (as  you  call  them^ 
and  natural  partions  ?  2.  Whether  Believing  be  fo,  only  ver' 
bum  dElivum^  but  Phylically  pafllive  ?  And  fo  to  !^elieve,  is  not 
ag-re^hmpAiior  recipere?  ?.  Whether  faith  be  paflivein  its 
Inflrumentality?  4.  Whether  the  fame  may  not  be  faid  as 
truly  of  other  Graces?  5.  Whether  Faich  be  any  proper 
Inftrument  of  our  Juitification?  6.  If  it  were ,  Whether 
that  be  the  primary  ,  formal  Reafon  of  its  juftifying  vcr- 
tu€  ?  7.  Whether  your  Opinion  or  mine  be  the  plainer  or 
fafer  ? 

And  for  the  firft,I  fhould  not  chink  it  worth  the  looking  after, 
but  that  I  perceive  you  lay  much  upon  it,  and  that  Philolophers 
generally  fuppofe  that  the  Sence  and  Inte'lcd  in  this  are  al  ke ; 
and  for  ought  I  difcern,  it  is  fuch  n.  Pafsivenefs  of  the  Intelleft 
that  you  intend  :  and  therefore  we  may  put  all  together, 
and  enquire  whether  videre  ^  intelUgere  be  only'  Pafsions  ?  And 
here  you  know  how  ill  Philofophers  are  agreed  among  them- 
felves,  and  therefore  how  ll  ppery  a  ground  this  is  for  a  man  to 
build  his  Faith  upon  in  fo  high  point  as  this  in  hand:  you  know 
alfothat  Hifptcrates.Gden,  PUto^  'Plotinui ,  with  the  genera- 
lity of  the  PUtonifis  arcdiredly  contrary  to  you: you  know 
alfothat  Alhertfit  MAgnutt  and  hi?  followers  judge  fenfation  to 
be  an  a  "^ion,  though  ihey  take  the  potently  to  be  paffivc.  You 
know  alfo  that  Aquitof  with  his  followers  judge  the  very  foten- 
tia  to  be  iftive  as  well  as  paflive  ^  pa/Jive  while  it  receiveth  thi 
fpecies  •yfind-^ffivt'^DH'n  per  ipfamst^it  c^  fenfationent  proditeit. 
And  T^/ef  faith,  that  this  is  Scotus  ^»; /f«**«f*i  2.  dt  Anim^. 
q*  12.  ^  Capreol.  &  fere  communis.  I  know  A^^nnat 
faith ,  that  xnulligere  efl  quoddam  pui  ;  but  he  taketh  pd^ti 
in  his  third  wide  improper  fenfe,  ^%oMneqtt  d  exitdepotentU  in 
aEifim^  pot  eft  diet  p4ti:  i.q.79  a.  2.C.And  no  doubt  every  fc- 
cond  caufe  may  be  faid  to  fuffer  even  in  its  ading,as  it  receiveth 
tfee  Influx  from  the  firft,  which  caofeth  it  to  ai3 ;  but  it  will  not 
Xhence  follow  that  the"'  viiere^inteiligert  e^  form^Uttr  pati  : 


(»i?0 


I 


5 cannot  think  that  you  deny  the  intekeElnm  agentem :    and  ycai 
^nowthat  j;cnerally  Philofophers  atcribure  A(5l.on  to  zhepoj/i, 
tie  Intelle^ :  and  that  J<?«J««.    Apollm^^  (frc  do  accordingly 
taaikc  ariiy^gent  aid  patient  fence  :  and  if  the  reception  of  the 
[pedes  were  formaiifer  vifto  &  intelleElio  (  which  1  beheve  not ) 
yet  how  hardly  is  it  proved  that  the  Organ  and  Intellect  are  on- 
ly pafsive  in  that  reception  ?     Yea  how  great  a  controveifie  is 
it  what  the  fcnfible  and  intelligibley/J/cj^/  are  ?  Yea  and  whether 
there  beany  fuch  thing  ?  Whether  they  bcanimageor  fiffiili- 
lude  begotten  or  caufcd  by  theObjtd,  as  Combaccki-u  and 
moft  ?  which    yet  SrmreK,,  &c,  denyerb.     And    whether 
they  ftick  in  the  air,  and  have  all  their  Being  tirft  there,  as  U^U- 
gj'-fij^and  other  Peripattiici^s  }     Or  whether  their  Being  is  on- 
ly in  the  eye  ?  as  fome  later.     Or  whether  it  be  Sir  Keti.'Vig- 
hyes  Atomes  or  number  of  fmall  bodies  which  are  in  perpetual 
n)o;ion  ?  I  doubt  not  you  know  thatOf/^^w  and  HenricHs  cjaod'- 
lib.  ^.f.  4.  rejed  ^W  [pedes  as  vain,  and  make  the  Intcllcft  the 
only  active  proper  caufe  of  intelledion.  And  Hobs  of  late  in  his 
book  of  humane  Nature  faith,    thit  viftble  and    intelligible 
fpecies,  is  the  grea$ejl  Pitra  iox  in  the  rvorU,  at  being  4  plain  /»»- 
f^J/tbtlitj.     Aud  indeed  it  is  fomewhatftrangc  that  every  ftonc 
and  clod  (hould  be  in  perpetual  Adion.fending  forth  that  which 
we  call  its  fpecies  j    for  doubtlefs  i:  fendeth  forth  as  much  when 
we  behold  it  not  as  when  we  do,.    And  more  ftrange  that  a 
Rock  or  Mountain  (hould  be  fo  aftivc  a  creature,  and  fo  forci- 
ble in  adion,  as  to  lend  forth  its  fpecies  fo  many  miles  I     Yea, 
according  to  this  Doctrine,  many  icod  miles:  for  if  our  Or- 
gan were  capable,  we  fhould  fee  it  fo  far.   Whether  the  Angels 
fee  thcfe  things  on  earth  red^teyido pedes ^qx  not,  furc  according 
to  this  Doctrme,  the /pedes  muft  reach  as  far  as  Heaven,     And 
why  do  not  ftones  waft  by  fuch  an  unctfTant  emanation?  And 
it  IS  flrange  ro  conceive  how  the  Air  is  bepainted  with  variety  of 
fpecies^  if  this  be  true  /   that  every  Grafs,  Flower,  Tree,  Bird, 
Jitone,  ^c.  and  other  bodies,  have  their  feveraldiftinct/pfc/V^ 
in  ttie  Air  night  and  day  ?    Ho  w  ftrangely  is  it  pamted  ?   What 
room  is  therefor  them  a!!,  without  coi.fufion  ,  If   both  color, 
quantity,  odor,  and  all  be  there  ?  And  its  ftrange  if  we  do  not 
hear  the  found  nor  taftc  thefweemefs,  &c.    but  only  the //>r- 

C  c    2  oitf 


Cl9<5) 


ciet  of  them  I    and  beyond  my  Capacity  how  we  fhould  dif- 
ccrh  'DtfUnce  38  well  a&  the  Ohje^  dtfiuKt  according  to  the  paf- 
livt  opinion  /  and  more  hard  is  it  for  me  tobeheve  thisDuft- 
rine,  when  I  confider  how  Cats  zud^Owls  fee  in  the  night .-  and 
how  a  man  in  a  deep  ftudy,  or  that  flcepeth  with  his  eyes  open, 
Teeth  not  any  thing  dillindly  ( though  i  kI^^w  the  frivolous  an- 
fwets  CO  thefe  ; )  And  yet  more  hardly  do  I  believe  it  when  I  feel 
^Pianto  labor e  &  con  ztu    I  mull  fee  to  read  a  fmall  print,  or  dif- 
cerrt  a  thing  afar  off :  but  above  all  when  I  feel  the  labor  of  my 
ftudics,  I  hardly  believe  that  my  underftanding  is  not  adive; 
though  I  eafily  believe  that  I  am  alfo  too  paffive.    Why  do  [ 
not  underftand  with  every  dull  thought?  To  believe  alfo  that 
every  ftone  is  ftill  adive,  and  that  the  eye  and  Intelled  of  the 
living  Creature  is  but  palfivc ,  is  hard  to  me ;    becaufe  mt 
thinks  Adion  better  tgreeth  to  the  living,  then  the  inanimate. 
And  yet  the  lefs  do  I  affent  when  [  obfervc  what  ftrefs  they  lay 
Bpon  the  firoilitude  of  a  looking-glafs  receiving  the  fpecier^ 
which  I  am  very  confident  it  did  never  receive,  when  I  fee  it 
moving  as  my  eye  moveth,  and  withdrawing  when  I  withdraw, 
( though  the  Objed  be  any  ftone  or  other  immovable  thirg  ) 
I  judge  that  when  I  am  gone,  theglafs  receivethno  more  fpicies 
from  the  Wall,then  the  wall  from  the  glafs^nor  that  the  water  re- 
ceives any  more /pedes  of  the  Moon  that  there  appears^thcn 
the  earth  doth;  but  that  all  is  in  mine  eyes  by  the  help  of  that  rc- 
fiedion.I  doubt  not  but  you  have  read  D'OrbelHs  arguments , 
{Di(i.  l,in  1.  fent.pAr.^.  ^.z.)  againft  both  extreamsin  point 
oi  intellection  .•  Againft  yours  hisreafons  feemto  me  ftrong  : 
^uia  ejfectus  aijuivocns  non  pote(i  excellere  in  ptrfectione  cau- 
fam  atfuivccam  totaUmfeddrfif  it  necejfario  ah  ea  ;  fed  intellectio 
ejfet  effectm  atjuivoctufpeciei  intelligihiii^  ,  Ji  ab  eafola  cattfart' 
tur^  (^itaejfet  ftmpliciter  fmperfectior  fpecie  intelligibi/i^    tftteti 
%on  eft  Virttm.     Turn  etiam  ^ttia  tunc  non  pojfet  falvari   imago 
inimnie^  tit  m^nsefl'.   ^ianHoilipfius  mentis  haberet  rationem 
purentis.     Itemtjaomodo  caufarentpsr  relationes  rationis,  Jive  in- 
ttntiones  logica,  (jttzfuntinABitcelUtivo?  cum  ilia  intentio  di- 
catur  realis  (jjUA  caufatHr  imediate  a  re  vtl  fpecie  reprefentante  rem 
in  fe 'Even  des  Cartes  h'ts  Dodrine  of  vibration  feemeth  to  make 
the  fenfation  and  intelledion  to  be  formally  Adion ,  though 
the  Organ  muft  firft  be  pa^ve  to  the  producing  it,  before  it  be 

AdivCt 


Cip7) 

A<3ivt.  Za^arelfCemhacchiu^,  &c.  fay  chat  in  fenfation  there 
is  firft  a  receiving  the  fpeciet,  2.  ^  judging,  &c.  The  firft  by  the 
<)rgan  which  is  partive,  and  the  later  f  which  is  the  very  finfa- 
tion  by  the  fenfuive  foul,  which  is  adive.  The:efore  Com- 
hacchi'.ts  faith,  IntelleElio  eft  opemtio  ariim<£  rAtionalis ^  (^rc. 
but  pajfio  is  not  cperatio.  Schtbler  determineth  it  (  Top. 
p.  23  2.  that  the  objeddoth  but  i.  Exdtart  potentias  Acti- 
ve ad  fictus.  2'  Terminare  iictiu .V'guenin  Infitt-it.  p.  261. 
befiJcs  the  intelleft  Agent,  afcribeth  to  the  Poffible  three 
offices.  I.  To  draw  and  receive  the //jraV/.  2.  A(3ually  to 
underftand.  3.  Toconferve  theZ/JfCff/.  The  hm^Viguerihs^ 
tnjlit.p.  17.  &  /i^uin.  I. if.  18  a.  5.  i.  StiAr(z.Tcm.l.dlfp^^. 
^.6.  Scaiiger  Exercit.^oj.  f.  t.  ^%z\[o  Bradivaraintf  Scona  , 
Cfijetatii  ambo,  Albert:  D'Orbtlhs^  Ruvio,  Al^tdust  Ktc- 
kerman  Stieriu/^  Zitnchius^  Bttrgerfdicias,  A.  C.  fafcic.  log, 
Trideaux  HjpomKem.  with  many  more ,  have  taughc  me  to  ac- 
count vifion,  intelIcdion,and  vohcion  for  Immanent  Ads.  And 
though  there  be  a  reception  of  thc//?fofj,and  fo  fornewhat  of 
paflionaswellasef  adion,  vet  that  of  paffion  is  but  a  prepa- 
ration or  t^tiafi  matertaie^zm  the  formnUels  inai^ion,  as  Kec- 
l^trman^  Sjji.log.p.  I  lO.  PhjficinonntiUid'tfcernHnt  materiale 
^formate :  fie  matertah  in  vtf(4  efi  rectptio [pecitrHm  vifibilium 
in  oculoj  ^M£  ejl  pajfto  :  tfl  dtinde  dtindicaiio  ret  li/ibJis  per  il- 
las  (pedes  ^H<t  t/}  actio  :  ioinc  e^  juod  Arijiot.  fenfum  modo  ad 
actionem ^modo  ad  pajfionem  rejert.  Z^iwr^i/^j  faith,  Vol.I.  T.3. 
p.  581.  Vim  omnem /enfitivam  t[fe  partim  pufsivum^  partim 
activftm,  diver fis  refptctihtts  ;  T-i(siva  efl  cfuatenus,  percipit 
ebje^M.  ABivaeft  (JHAtenpu  ipfa  ab  objeBo  affi^J^  p ^ir it  j en- 
fumy  ^  rem  unam  ab  alio  difcerr.it ^Putcntia  enim  vifivd  pofl- 
<jHam  recepit  coloris  albi/peciem,difctrn>t  hant  a  nigre^  &c,  [k  in 
rebus  Divinti  vis  nofira  mentis  e?"  voluntatis  &  p^-^Jfiva  (^  a6li- 
vaefi.  PaffivaejHatenusrecipit gratiamaDeo  ia  nobis tperante  : 
ABiva  veroquAtenm  afetla  Dei  gratia,  ipf/i  Credit^ipfa  Am^tt  ^ 
A^i  enim  Agimw.  Res  fua  natura  inrellg  blrs  vis  \xc  anima: 
Patiens  intelleBas  appellata,  efficit  fuo  lum  ne  ,  fuaque  AElione^ 
nt  res  aUu  intelligantHr.  Hoc  lumen  inttll,  Sins  Agent  is,  hcc  efi, 
anima.  no/Ira ^  non  minima  pars  tjl  imagir.is  Det  in  (jua  crtati  ft^^ 
mus.     Obfcuratufmtlttx  nobis  ccjnmynlcAiapsr  peccathm  ^-dtj 

cc  3  /fa 


C.c^S) 


fed  illffflratur  cler.Ho  per  (^lorijium  t  uncie  hac  nova  luce  Dtnm 
Dii^ue  mjfleriavuelligimiu ^  fi<£certe ^nimaiis  homo  percip^re 
n  >n  potejl.  Troimeie  {um  fjjemtu  tenthra,  cier.Ko  fa^i  Jftmus  c^ 
voc^mur  lux  /»  T)om'KO.  tx  h:tc  noy**  luce  doKatA  per  ChnJIum  , 
i»teLigimfis  cju-.dfti  iitelle^ui  A^tnr.  Zanch.  ibid.  p.  596.  You 
lee  ho»v  is^r Zunch.K^  Philofoph^-  and  Divinity  is  from  yours  .  fj 
f  •  594*  Sji  antem  mtmfefla  ii  nohis  hcc  i»-e//eiJfis  '^£iio^ 
lumpct  iniellgcre.  £t  p.ig.61'^.  He  faith  the  inLelled  hath 
feur  operations,  i.  Sim;licium  Apprehenjio.  z.  Hur^tm  Contpo- 
ft'to.  3.  CornfoftorHrTi  xjiimAtio^to^tie  er  verorum  a  falfit  divi- 
jh.  ^.  Ex  Hj  ratiocinatio.  And  you  know  that  Ze/^z,  having 
torfiierly  thought,  with  ^y^pd.  Paul.  Vemt.  &  C-ja.  ihac 
j'enfa'.'o  (  er  ita  i?}te''ectio  )  (ft  formaliter  pafsio  ^  did  cliangc 
his  judgement,  and  at  laft  conclude  that  t^'tft:)  -vel  fenfAtio 
altAdmi  muut  diciti  unummaterialtter^  ^  kic  eft  receviy  fpe- 
citi'.  altcrumfornja/lter,  (^  hie  eft  JBio  :  Prior  infft  Orga- 
fjo rat'rone  muter. a  :  pofterior ratione  fotentia^  C^  a  ima  :  tfimeu 
UterqHe  liiemintft  Orgayio.  Prior  (jHidcm  non  efi  lubftantialiter 
&  tjffKti,. liter  Jet)fu[io^  fed  concqmitaMs  (;^  velut  dfpofitio:  pofte- 
rior eft  e([eyitiaitterft»fAtio. 

But  I  have  been  too  tedious  on  thif.  vid.  ultra  in  I.  2.  de  Ani- 
**t^ip.  7<?,77.G7r.  &  l.^.q.  13.  &c.  You  fee  my  reafons  in  part 
whylniay  think  my  fell:  excufable ,  though  I  build  not  an 
^'vrticie  of  my  faith  on  your  Philofophical  aflercion  j  \jh.it  vide- 
y e\aud'.re\(^and fu 1 0  bil eve)  a'-eCrammatical actions  fOdly  j  (for 
you  muft  fav  {only^  or  you  lay  no[hing)and  but  phyfical  pafilons. 

^efl.  1  Whether  10  Belteve  be  only  vctbum  acrivi  m  ? but phy- 
cally  P'^ft'^f^  <i»d  a  man  by  bellevirg  doth  not  operari,^«;  recipere. 

This  QueHion  comes  a  litcle  clofer.  By  operuri  1  know  you 
mean  agirc  -.  for  if  you  Hiould  mean  fuch  an  optratiot  as  Opef*- 
ritii  pro  wercede  ex  dibi'o  performeth  ,  then  you  Oiould  fay 
nothing^bucdifpute  aga'nft  what  I  difavowed  even  in  the  letter 
you  anfwer  (  which  1  dare  not  impute  to  you  )  Now  the  rea- 
lons  that  force  me  10  dffer  vehemently  from  you  (  as  you  faid 
10  mc  )  in  this  point,  ai  e  pai  tly  Philofophical,  pai  cly  Theologi- 
cal. And  I.  I  would  fainknow  what  that  is  which  you  hcr-e 
callfrt*  ^,and  fay  f>j;»ry^ff?  hit  the  Habit  ?  No  :  Fori.  That 
csnnotbepaflivc.  2.  That  isnot  it  that  juflifieth.  3.  That  is 
net  a  paifion,  as  ^ou  fay  this  is.   4.  That  is  not  a  Grumw^ticAl 

Action 


(l^p) 


''^Etion,  as  you  hy  this  is ;  What  then  !  U  it  the  ASl  of  F^ith  ? 
No:  Fori.     Tbatsitthatyou  are  denying,^nd  fay  its  but  z/f^- 
' hum  uSlivHtn.     2.    YonUy,  it  :-i  pijfive.     But  how  an /;<.?;<»» 
can  hcp.iJJ7ve,  isfofar  beyond  the  reach  of  my  weak  under- 1 
ftanding,  that  I  cou'd  not  believe  if,though  it  wrre  fuJged  He-' 
relie  to  deny  it.     Pjifso  intrinfecum  ord^nem  <^iil'  ad  fnojfctunr^ 
C  ripifgnat  dari  pajjimem  extra  fnhjecttim^  faith  St4  i.'t^.  Tomz. 
d}fp^^.p:^%i.     And  chat  Action  cm  be  the  lubjcrt  of  'Taf- 
fim,  (s  Philofoph}  that  I  never  learned,   and  I  think  never  TnaU 
do      Efpecially  if  S:hibler  and  molt   Philofophers  fay  true 
that  Actio  (^  pafsionon  d  jferunt  remitter  fed  fecundstm  iKax/x^t^a- 
to.f  concept  y  J.     For  very  many  have  taught  me,    thurothePc- 
ripateticksitis  abfurd  for  the  fame  to  be  both  the  Ad'.on^Taf' 

/ion  and  Ta^nm  ;  yea  to  common  reafon  it  is 

Moft  certainly  therefore  it  is  neither  Hairit,  nor  v^c  r  of  faith 
which  you  callfaith.  What  is  it  thenPIs  it  a  Pafionfi)  you  fay  your 
felf,  and  therefore  I  muft  take  that  to  be  your  meaning  :     And 

1  cannot  imagne  whatelfe  you  fhould  call  faith  But  here  you 
leave  me  at  as  great  a  lofs  as  before.  For,  t.  Youfayjtis  P^f- 
fve;  But  I  never  heard  or  read  before  of  a  pafuve  Puf 
fion^  any  more  then  of  a  Pajsive  Action'.  And  if  I  (hould  fet 
my  underftanding  on  the  wrack  ic  would  not  apprehend  or  ac- 
knowledge any  fuch  thing.  I  cannot  imagine  that  it  is  the  foul 
it  felf  which  you  fay  is  pafsive.     i .  Bccaufe  you  fay  it  is  faith, 

2  Becaufe  elfc  your  Argument  muft  conclude  that  the  foul  only  is 
rhe  inftrument  But  we  are  not  qucftioning  the  inftrumentality  of 
the  foul  now,  but  of  faith.     More  I  might  urge  to  ilicw  that 
this  cannot  be  your  meaning,  but  that  I  will  not  fuppofe  that  it 
is  the  foul  it  (elf  which  yoa  call  ftith.    It  being  therefore  nei- 
ther the  Soul^  Habit ,  Act,  nor  Pafsion  which  you  here  fay  is 
Pafstve  in  its  it(irumtnta!ity  ,  I  am  forced  to  confefs   I  know 
sot  what  you  mean  :  Yet  if  you  (houldmean  any  Potemia  Taf- 
(iv'a.     I.  Whether  there  beany  fuch  in  the  rational  foul  dftinifl 
from  the  foul  it  felf,is  a  great  doubt.  2.  If  there  were, I  know  not 
how  it  can  be  called  fuith.^.  Nor  is  it  fuch  a  Pottr.tia  that  is 
the  i-.rirumentofjuftificatiop.Yet  afterwards  yoa  fay,  It  is  an 
act  of  dependance,which  here  you  call  a  Pafsion. 

2.    But  whether  A^  or  Poffion^  it  muft  belong  either  to  the 


(200} 


VphrfiAndirg^ot  }VUL  ox  both'.  And  i.  If  you  (bould  place  ic 
only  in  the  underftanding,  you  would  C  befides  Dr.  DownAm) 
havefew  butthe  Papiliswiih  you.  2-  If  in  the  Will  only,  then 
(  as  Scripture   is  moft  plain  againrt  ir,  fo  )  you  would  alfo  go 
againft  che  generality  of  our  Divines    McUnClhon,  Jo.  froci-^^ 
ylwefiM  ,  Oavenavt,     &c.     make  it  the  common  Proteftant 
Tencc,  thAticisin  both.      In  aUu  fi'iei  jHflifiCantii  tota  annta 
fe  convert'tt  ad Cdftfum  juftifica^tem  :   Davcnant,Detcrm.  Q^ ^ 8. 
pj^.     174.  F^des  ilia  quam  Scriptura  jitfitficantem  agnofcit^habtl 
in  fe  CO  ■ipLcatHm  aEium  volxtnmtn  0-  ir.ttUeUu4.     idem.  ibid. 
•^•37-f^I-  ^^^'     -^"^  to  them  that  chink  it  abfurd  to  have  it 
in  both  faculties,    I  anfwer  with  the  fame  Author,      i.    ^(id 
philcf  ikaKtfir  volffntmiem  f^  iKte/leHum  e^t  duM  potentioi  re  ipfa 
dtJiiriCloi,  dogma  phi/ofoptjiCHm   ej}  ab  omnibus  hand  receptum, 
(not  of  ^'coittf  and  his  followers,  with  many  morej  &The- 
oLogicis  d^gmatibtts  firmandu  out  infirmandu  fundament m  mini* 
me   idcHcum.  2.    Ntq-^nobiiabftirdtim^  fed  valds  conftrtansum 
z'iaetffr^a^iiav  i//ftm  ano  tota  ant  ma  pun  fie  at  ur  cr  jujiificatftrj  aJ 
totam  aniWiim  pertinere  :  ita  ut  in  nudo  intelltctft  habeat  wittum^in 
V olftnt ate  complement um.    Idem.  ibid. 

3.  if  you  fay  it  is  in  both  (  as  I  doubt  not  but  you  will,  it 
being  the  plain  Truth  )  then  i.  It  cannot  pofsibly  be  any  one 
lingk  ^-'ct  otTaJfion  which  you  call  the  pajfive  Inftrumeatt 
and  do  you  think  to  find  out  many  fuch.^  2.  For  that  whicfi 
belongech  to  the  underiUnding,  i:  muft  be  either  ay* -wp/^^i^/jr*- 
henfion,  a  covtpofttton  or  dizifon,  or  a  ratiocinttion  or  Jahemtnt. 
And  I.  A  fimple  Apprehenfionitcannot  be  :  I.  For  fotheln- 
telledreccivech  all  Objeds  alike.  Ic  receiveth  fin,  death,  un- 
riphteoufnefs,  Sscan,  heil  \n  the  fame  kind  asitrcceivethGrace, 
Life, KighceournefsChrift, Heaven. Forit  underftandeth  both  in 
the  fame  way.  receiving  rhem  per  modhmobjectii. And  thus  it 
receivech  not  the  very  thng  ic  fielf  EfTentially,  ( though  it  under - 
)?<tW  the  thing  ic  felf)buconIy  as  is  faid,the/;)^«Vjor  aflion  of  it, 
f^^-.f  except  you  will  fay  as  sir  Ken.Di^by^  and  the  Lord  Byook^^ 
that  the  thing  underftood  is  really  in  the  underftanding,  and 
become  one  with  ic  )  Now  according  to  this  rencc,yoa 
would  not  make  fin. h  to  receive  Chrill  or  his  Righteoufnefs 
acalljbut  only  the  fpeaes  or  Idea  of  them. 3.  And  how  oft 

hath 


Zol  ) 


hath  Btllarmrte  been  called  ScpMfier  for  fi-ppofing,  we  meaa 
fuch  an  apprehcrfion  ?  Therefore!  will  not  dare  to  think  that 
ycu  mtan  this,  4.  /*  rd  if  you  did.  ycc  I  havefhe\red  tow 
uncertain  it  is,  that  this  int^ti^crt  is  cnfj  or  for tr, ally  p.ui.  2.  But 
if  yen  mean  not  this  fmvle  apinkeyfiot:  (  as  fureyci]  do  net ) 
then  how  isitpofsiblc  to  im-'g  ne  thcurdcrftar.c'ir.g  fliculd  be 
f;fijpvc  in  it  ?  Did  ever  rr;anfhac  writ  of  Pl'iilofcphy  orce  think 
that  the  foul  did  corr^poync  c.itiHre,rdiii,ii>:.-,ri^jtidic:ire,  yati- 
indf)  G^  r.cn  cgtre.o}  I  think  HO  iD3n.  When  To/.*/  difputeth 
rtli'UKJ  irtcliigerefit  fat'i}  lie  i?^\\\\^  Adtertertii^nt  (fi  cjuodjc'una 
efi  de  ajp'ehty.ftcve  -^  ram  de  con  p->Jiticru  C^  ftiJ  do  ran  eji  du- 
bt'tnapudomne'.  'Xo\.  ck  :ir.-mi.  p.'i66.  1  will  not  therefore 
fuppofe  you  to  differ  in  y  cur  Philofcpliy  frcm  all  men.  What 
Adofthe  underi'.andirg  ycu  will  maketobe  part  oi' JuHify- 
iug  faith,  I  know  not  •  tor  I  find  Divines  are  very  htik  sgrecd 
in  it ;  Hut  the  moft  make  Aff  nt  to  be  the  only  Ad  of  the  un- 
der ftanding  (  thotjgh  fomc  add«c;if.\3  )  and  of  them  feme  make 
it  £jff ;;fT<?/ to  juflifying  Faith  :  and  others  but  as  a  commor> 
preicqulfite  Ad.  Now  if  it  were  j^^eyfus  Nocirftt^  yet  it  is 
impo'sibleit  fliould  be  formally  a  P;ifsion  :  but  much  more  im- 
pofjible  when  it  is  /^jfmfas  dlanoeticus  vtl  difurftvjis^  as  is  mcft 
evident  it  \%^  a nd~4jnr  judicious  Rob.  BarorApti  truly  teacheib, 
Phi/of.  Thtcl.  Aned.  Exerc^.  sy^rt.  16. 

Moft  Divifie*  plJicc  the  chief  EfTcnce  of  Fa'thin  fdttcia  .•  but 
then  tbeyare  jis  ill  agreed  what  to  mean  by  fiducla.  'T tmble 
wowld  fain  pcrfwade  us  that  to  Believe  the  Truth  of  a  particu- 
lar Promifc:, is  to  truft  on  the  performance  of  it  to  me;  and  that 
the  /:jfe»t  of  Faithwhich  is  gjventofuchaPromife,is  properly 
c^WciJi  fidurif.fjrTrufl.  But  this  is  grounded  ofi  his  lingular  opi- 
nion ,  that  7~rf^rj[7  and  G'f<7^«f/}  are  all  one,  c>"C.  Baroriasy  pag- 
i:i,2.  tels  us  of  a  four-fold /i3'»f*4  :  The  firft  he  makes  to  be 
but  a  confident  Aflent  to  the  Truth  of  the  Promife,  and  a  firm 
fisre  Perfwafion  of  thcRemilsionpf  my  bvn  fins  and  of  nry 
Salvation.  The  fccondis  a  Reftingon  GodsGoodnefs  alone, 
err.  He  placeth  ihejuftifying  venue  only  in  the  firft,  which 
ret  containctft  but  partly  Aflent  (  which  we  plead  againft  the 
Papiflsufuallv  nor  tobc  the  juflifying  Ad)  and  partly  a  par- 
ricultr  Ferfwsfioti  or  Belief  of  Pardon,  which  is  properly  no 

D  d  Faith. 


C2-01) 

I'akh,  but  that  commonly  called  Aflufancc.  Now  this  kind  of 
fi.Ucia  is  but  the  Affcnt  v\e  have  fpokcn  of,  and  is  beyond  all 
difpute  no  meer  Paffion^hni  an  A^  of  ihe  UnderlUnding. 

2.  But  moft  Divines  make  thar^-/«o,j  which  is  an  ad  of  the 
/■f;'/ to  have  the  chief  hand  in  this  work  of  jul\fiying  :  though 
B*roKi:is  is  fo  confident  that  it  is  not  an  act  of  Faith,  but  an  Ef- 
fect and  Confequent,  that  he    takes  it  for  a  thing  fo  raanifeft, 
that  irneedeth  no  proof,    p    234.     And  Dr.  Downam  hath 
brought  not  a  few,  nor  contemptible  Arguments  to  the  fame 
purpofe  againft  Pemble ,  Afpsnd.  to  Covennat  of  Gr.     Yet 
though  we  have  found  it  in  the  Will,  yet  it  is  hard  to  find  wliat 
act  of  the  Will  they  mean.  If  it  been  Elici;  .-^cf^it rouft  firft 
cither  refpect  the  End,  and  then  it  is  either  velle  intendere  vtl 
frui  •  But  fure  fidvcia  is  none  of  thefe  •  and  if  it  were,  it  is 
more  furcthatat  leaft   the  two  firft  are  not  Pajfioas-^  and  I 
think  not  the  laft,  though  it  be  nothing  to  the  prefent  point : 
Of  elfc  2.    It  muft  refpect  the  Means  ;  and  then  it  muft  be 
£U^ere,  (^onfentire  vtl  Vti  (  in  which  joined  to  AJJentt  I  take 
juftifying  Faith  Co  confift  )  :  Cut  it  is  both  evident  that  none  of 
thefe  isfidficU,  and  if  they  were  ,   that  none  of  thefe  are  paf. 
fietis  or  f^Jfive.     So  that  hitherto  we  are  to  feek  for  this  Pafsiyc 
Faith. 

Or  elfe  it  is  an  Imp.irate  Act  ^  and  then  we  are  in  a  wood  to 
feek  among  fo  many  that  there  is  little  hope  of  finding  it.  The 
Truth  feems  to  me  to  be  beyond  difpute,that  fclucia  is  no  one 
fingle  Act  ( though  one  word  )  but  a  compofition  of  many  im- 
plying or  containing  the  aWffent  of  the  undcrftanding,  the 
£/^<rrfo«of  theWill,  cfpecially  much  of  Hope  and  iy^fdverjtH- 
ro;</«f/r  inthelrafcibleof  the  Send. ivc,  together  with  a  fufpen- 
fion  of  fome  acts.  And  if  we  are  jurtified  by  this  Recumbency 
or  Fiducia^  1  fhall  believe  we  are  juftificd  as  well  by  Hope  as  any 
thing  ;  for  that  takes  up  mofl  here,  as 'Dr.  Downam  ubifupra 
provetb.  And  who  everfaid  that  in  all  or  any  of  thefe  the 
l>Oul  ii  Paffive  and  not  sy^ctiwe  ?  Indeed  Hope  and  Fenturoufnefs 
are  Pajfiont^  but  in  another  fenfe  (  as  Keckerm.  and  Tolet 
ubiftiprA  have  well  opened  j  Its  in  refpect  of  their  tjuafi  materi- 
ale.  )  I  amcontcnttoftandor  fallby  thevoteof  Philofophers, 
jiving  yen  i  OQ  to  one,  whether  the  Formality  of  thfe  motions 


J 


(Z03) 


of  the  fVillUe  iiPafiion  or  Astion}  And  if  they  Attt^cts  , 
whether  t bey  can  betke  Subjects  of  P^ifsion  ^  und  jo  htpafsivt 
Acts  ?    So  that  yet  J  cannot  find  out  your  pafsive  Faith. 

g.  But  yen  further,  if  Faith  be  paUivc  Phyfically,  let  us 
f'nj  out  fi.'lt  what  is  the  /Igent  f  z.  What  the  .'Jction  ? 
5.  What  [he /W/e«^  or  Object  ?  4.     What  is  ibe  Terminfts  ad 

I.  I  doubt  not  but  it  is   agreed  that  the  Agent  is  God  ; 
for  it  is  hethat  juftifieth.     2,     i  [xQiermims  or  ret  motnfaSla  i^ 
two- fold.    I.  jutiificacion  infen^M  UgUf  rommonfy  called  co^/- 
ft itfttive  fftflific.it inn  (pafsive.   )      2.  'PubLcjae  Jaflification  by 
pleaandfeateKceatfi4(igement  (pafsive)    3.  The  Aftion  muil: 
be  therefore  two-fold,  or  two  Adions  according  to  rlie  two- 
fold Terrnintis.     Yea  in  the  former  we  may  ('  if  we  accurately 
confider  it  )    rind  out  a  two-fo!d  AtlioH  and  Termi^uj^  though 
the  difference  be  narrow  ;    In  which  we  arc  to  conlider,  i .  Of 
thelnftrument,     2.  And  the  nature  of  the  Actions,     i.  The 
Inftrumcnt  is  the  word  of  Promifc  or  Grant  in  the  Gofpel  (  for 
if  you  know  any  other  way  of  Gods  juftifying,or  any  immedi- 
ate Ad  of  God  herein  which  is  1  ranlient  Jwould  it  were  reveal- 
ed What  Ad  it  is.  )  Herein  1  have  Mr.  Rfttherfoy-d  hying  as  I , 
over  and  over  againft  the  AnttKomiant.     2.  The  Adion  there- 
fore can  be  no  other  then  a  moral  Action,  as  a  Leafe  or  Bond, 
or  written- Law  may  be  faidto  act.  Now  the  Gofpel  pcrform- 
cth  to  our  firft  Juftification  a  two-fold  Action,     i.  It  doth 
as  a  Deed  of  Gift  beftow  Chrift  and  his  Merits  on  men,  fo  it  be 
they  will  Believe.     This  Action  doth  not  immediately  and  di- 
rectly conftitucc  them  Righteous :  for  Rightcoufncfs  being  a 
Relation,  muft  have  its  Foundation  firft  laid  :  This  Act  there- 
fore of  Donation  (^  which  fomecal!  Imputation)  doCh  directly 
lay  the  F««c/4i»f';;«»»,whence  the  Relation  of  Righteous  doth 
i  Immediately  arife  (  when  the  Condition  ispeformcd  )  pernu" 
iXAnt  r tfnlt Ant i am  Without  any  other  Act  to  produce  it.     And 
this  is  moft:    properly   called    Juflificatio  conjiitHtiva   aUiva. 
2.    When  the  Gofpel  hath  by  Gift  conftituted  us  Righteous, 
then  next  in  order  it  doth  declare  or  pronounce  us  Righteous, 
and  rcrtually  acquit  us  from  Condemnation.    This  is  by  the  like 
filet^t  moral  interpretative  Action  only  as  the  other.  (  And  per- 
•  Dd  2  bap» 


iiap;  m  \y  be  moft  fitly  called  the  imputing  of  Rif^lueoufnefs,  or 
ellecmingus  Righreousjas  Pifcutor.  )  And  for  the  litt<ri  Julii- 
fication  at  Jadgcment,  the  Action  is  Chrifts  publiquc  pleading, 
and  fenrenntig  us  Acquitt  :    wh-ch   is  an  Action  both  Phy- 
llcal  and  Moral  in  feveral  refpeds.    4.  New  if  we  enquire  af- 
ter the  Patient,  or  rather  the  Objed  of  thefe  feveral  Ads  we 
fti.ill  quckly  find  that  the  Min  is  that  Objcd  ;  but  that  Faith  is 
any  Patient  here,  is  paft  my  apprehenfion.     FortbefirftAd 
of  God  by  the  Gofpei  [_  giving  Chrift  Jind  his  Merit  to  us,  3  ^^  '^ 
only  a  moral  Adion ;   (  Though  the  writting  and  fpeaking  the 
Word  atfirrt  was  a  Phyfical  adion,  yet  ihe  Word  or  Pro- 
T[\\{t  no'^  diOi\\m!iralitertantum  agere  \    )      And  therefore  it  is 
impofsihle  that  Faith  (hould  be  Phyfically  pafsive  from  it.    For 
Pafsion  being  an  effectof  Action,  itmuft  be  a  Phyfical  proper 
Action  which  produceth  a  phyfical  Pafsion.    I  wil!  not  (land  to 
make  your  Affertion  odious  here  by  enquiring  what  Phyfical  ef- 
fective Influx,  Contact,  &c.    here  is,  which  (hould  manifeft 
Faith  to  be  phyfically  Pafsive.     I  know  in  the  Work  of  effec- 
tual vocation  the  Soul  is  firft  pnfsive  :  but  that  is  nothing  to  our 
Queftion,    whether  Faith  be  pafsive  in  Juftification.      Do 
but  tell   roe  plainly  ^v/Vi  p.ititur  -fidei ,  and  you  do  the  Bufi- 
ncfs. 

But  what  if  you  had  only  faid  that  Faith  is  morally  pajfive^ 
and  not  p'orftcM/y  ?  I  anfwer.  It  had  been  lefs  harfh  to  me, 
fhough  not  fie,  nor  to  the  point.  For  i.  Gods  Jufti^cation 
nor  Donation  of  Chrift,  W  not  properly  of,  or  to  Fairh ;  for 
then  Faith  fhould  be  made  righteous  and  juflih'ed  hereby ;  but 
CO  the  perfon,  ii  he  Believe.  2.  Befides  if  you  Qiould  confefs 
OHiy  a  rao.ral  Pafsivcnefs  (  which  H  fomewhat  an  odd  phrafe  and 
norion,and  is  but  to  be  tht  Object  of  a  moral  Action  )  it  would 
fpoil  ail  the  common  arguments  drawn  from  the  phyfical  nature 
of  Faith,  and  its  fole  excellency  hercm  in  apprehending,  re- 
ceiving, &c.  and  thereby  juftifying.  And  you  would  bring 
in  all  other  Graces  to  which  the  fame  Promife  may  as  well  be 
faid  to  be  made.  3.  The  Truth  I  have  and  further  (hallmani- 
feft  CO  be  this;  that  as  it  is  not  to  faith  or  any  other  act  that 
Rightcoufncfs  is  given,  but  to  the  perfon  on  condition  he  Be- 
Ji'cvc  J  fo   this  condition  is  no  pafsion  but  an  action,  or  di- 


vers 


(xo5) 

vers  actions.  This  will  fully  appear  in  the  i  bcological  Rcafons 
following. In  the  mean  time  I  need  not  (land  on  this,  becaufc  you 
esprefs  yourfelf  that  Faith  is  phy.^aslly  paf.ive.  Indeed  you 
add  [  or  hyfcrphyficallj  :  ]]  but  though  I  meet  jyich  fomc 
Philolbphers,  that  ufe  in  fuch  cafes  to  give  [_hype)plvftce'\  as  a 
teittum  to  overthrow  the  fufficiency  of  the  dirt-nction  of  phfi- 
cc  &  mcraliter^  yet  I  fuppofe  that  is  none  of  your  meaning  who 
know  chat  even  intelle^ias  ^um  ejficit  wtdlefltcnem^  ^  vdnKtaic 
Z'ohtiontm,  Jur.tcafif&  phjica,  u^  Suarcz.  i.  Tom.  difp.  \-j.i^. 
2.  p.  260.  and  (0  Schihler^  and  many  more  :  yea  and  chat  our 
Divines  conclude  that  Gods  action  on  our  fouls  in  conv^rfi. 
on  is  firft  Phyfical  :  which  yet  may  be  as  Ciuly  and  fully  cj.lled 
hyperphyfical  ss  our  Faith. 

Now  for  the  fccond  action  of  the  Gofpd  ,  [  dicU- 
ting  or  pronouncing  the  Bclitver  righteoifs  ^  ay.d  fo  di  m- 
re  ac(j(iitti>:g  him  ;  ]  Ic  is  much  more  beyond  my  reach 
to  conceive  how  faith  can  in  refpect  of  it  be  pafsive  :  For 
1.  Befides  that  it  is  amoral  action  as  the  former,  and  fo 
cannot  of  it  felf  produce  a  phyfic.1l  pafsion.  a.  It  doth  not 
therein  fpeak  of  or  to  faich ,  pronouncing  it  juQ,  snd  ac- 
quitting it ,  but  of  and  to  the  Believer.  So  that  li  Faith 
were  phyfically  pafjivc  in  the  former,  yet  hereit  is  irapofsible. 
.^. If  you  fay  that  it  is  phyfically  (ormorally)paf5ivcinreg3rd 
of  the  latter  full  Juftification  by  fentence  at  Judgement,  you 
would  tranfcend  my  capacity  moft  of  all.  To  fay  faith'is  the 
Patient  of  Chnfts- judiciary  publiquc  fentence.is  a  fentence  that 
ftiall  never  be  an  article  of  my  Fsith :  and  is  fo  grofs.thac  I  con- 
jecture you  would  take  it  ill  if  I  (jiould  take  it  to  be  your  mean- 
ing s  therefore  1  will  fay  no  moreagaiuft  it.  Nowyouknow^ 
that  this  is  (  as  you  fay  in  your  Lei}.  )  the  moft  conjp/e^t  Jujii- 
fication-^  and  which  I  moft  ftandupon  :  and  therefore  if  your 
arguments  fatl  in  refpect  of  this,  they  yield  me  almoftill  I 
expect. 

Next  I  will  tell  ycu  ray  Rcafons  Theological  why  I  believe  not 
that  juftifying  faith,  as  fuch,is  pafsive.  i.  All  Divines  and  the 
Scripture  it  felf  hath  perfwaded  me,  that  Chrift  and  the  Pro- 
mifes  are  the  Object  of  this  Faith  :  but  a  Pafsion  hath  no  Ob. 
jcctj  but  a  fabjcct,  &c.  Therefore  according  to  you  Chrift,  ^c. 

Dd  3  is 


is  not  the  object  of  it ;  which  is  contrary  CO  all  that  I  have  heard 
or  read,  ^ 

2.  I  have  read  Divines  long  contending  ft'WA  »/ the  Act  of 
juftifying  faith  ,  qua  talis.  And  Tome  fay  one  ,  and  feme 
another;  but  all  fay  one,or  other  or  many.  Now  you  cut  the 
Knot,  find  contradict  all,  in  making  it  (at  leail  ^mtenus  fn- 
jiifcani)  no  Act  atall^  huta  Pa fsto»:  unlefs  you  will  fay  it  is 
a  pafsiveaci^  which  I  dare  not  imagine.  And  doubtlefs  thefe 
Divines  (hew  by  their  whole  fpe-rch  that  by  Actus  Fidei,  they 
mean  Actus  fecuMc-H:  vil  Actic^  and  not  ActHSprimf^s  vei  enn- 
tativus  vel occidental's, five  ut  informiinSf  five  Ut  operativut,  fed 
ipj^cperatic. 

3 . 1  am  truly  afraid  left  by  entertaining  this  opinion  I  (houlJ 
ftrikeinnot  only  with  the  ^»/»'o>r>.^w;  (whocannotendure  to 
hear  of  any  conditions  of  life  of  our  performing,  but  even  with 
the  Lilrer tines, who  tell  me  to  my  face,  that  man  is  but  Pafsive, 
and  as  the  foul  Ads  the  body,  fo  Chrift  in  them  raovc:h  the 
loul  to  Good,  and  Satan  to  evil,  while  they  arc  mecrly  Paf- 
five,  and  therefore  the  Devil  (hall  be  damned  for  fin  who 
committeth  it  in  them  ,  and  not  ibcy  j  for  who  will  bite  the 
Itoneor  beat  the  i!aff,or  be  angry  at  the  fword-?-(^f, 

4.Elfe  you  mutt  deprcfs  the  excellent  grace  of  faith  below  all 
orher,  in  making  it  meerly  Pafsive  while  others  are  adivc : 
For  doubdefs  life  and  excellency  is  more  in  Adionthen  PaC 
fion. 

.5.    If  believing  be  only  fuffering ,   then  all  Infidels  arc 
damned  only  for  not  fuffcring,which  is  horrid. 

6.  Scripture  frequently  condemneth  wicked  men  for  Adion, 
for  Kebellion,  Refufing,  RejedingChrili,  Ink' "i 9' 27  They 
hate  him  and  fay ,we  will  not  have  this  man  reign  over  us,  &c, 
and  this  is  their  unbelief.  If  they  refitted  the  Holy  Ghoft  only 
PaJ/ive  er  non  ay^Siive  ,  then  it  would  be  only  an  intptiiudo 
tnttteriei^  which  isin  all  alike  at  firft,  and  fo  all  fhould  be  alike 
rejeders. 

7.  Ifto  believe  bebut  ?/«r/,then  itisGod  and  not  man  that 
fhould  be  perfwaded  :  For  perfwafion  is  cither  to  Action  or 
forbearing  Action  ;  and  God  is  the  Agent:  But  it  is  in  vain 
to  pcrfwade   any  to  be  Paftive,   except  it  be  not  to  ftrive 

againtt 


againftic.  This  therefore  would  overthrow  much  of  the  ufe  of 
the  Mmiftry.     - 

8 .  And  then  whcnChrift  foex'ollech  dol^rg  ths  VfHI  of  God, 
^r\d,  doing  hU  (^ommanimeyitty  crc.  you  will  exclude  juftifying 
faith,  as  being  no  do:^^. 

9.  Is  it  credible,  that  when  Chrift  cals  faith  Obeying  the 
Cojpely  and  fiich,  Th's  U  the  work  ofGod^  thi'ye  believe  on  him 
i.vhrm  the  fa:  her  h^th  [ent-^  and  calls  it  the  rvork^  off/tit  h,  2  Thef. 
I.  II.  and  faith,  God gtvcth  towill,  (that  is,  to  believe) ^Wrt? 
do^  cfrc.  that  all  this  is  meant  of  meer  Pafsion  ?  I  undertake 
to  bring  forry  places  of  Scriprure  th.u  lliew  fj;:h  to  be 
Action. 

I  o.  It  fecmeth  to  me  fo  great  a  debafing  of  fciich,  as  to  make 
it  CO  benovertuc  at  all,  nor  to  have  any  moral  gnod  in  it. 
For  though  \  have  read  of  Paffio  ptrfen;iv:i  it  genere  entii  vet 
Tjatur.c,  andconducibkcovertuc^  Yet  am  I  not  convinced  yet 
that  any  Pafsfonas  fuch,  hath  any  moral  vertue  in  ir.  Indeed 
Pafsion  maybe  the  ^f4afi  mueri/tle^  but  the  vertue  is  in  Acti- 
on. Yea,  even  in  non-acting,  fas  filcnce)  the  venue  lies 
formally  in  the  actual  exercife  of  the  Authority  of  Rcafon, 
and  fo  obeying  God  in  caufing  that  (ilence,  Suic  if  men  (hall 
be  all  judged  accordin{»  to  their  works,  and  according  to  whac 
•they  have  done,  6^ ^'.  then  it  will  not  be  becaufc  they  did  ei- 
ther Pati  oel »on  pati.  And  thu^  youh?.ve  forae  ofmy  reafons 
why  I  cannot  believe  that  'Believing  is  pafiion,  nor  fhal!  be- 
lieve it  I  think,  till  Credere  be  Pati ,  and  then  I  may  whe- 
ther I  will  or  no,  becauf:  pati  .vel  nen  ptti  are  not  in  my 
choice.         '■'   -  ',       '■  '^    ■■  ■  r  '■  '  ■•   ^  ^  >  - 

5.  The  third  Q^t^\orC^^^yhetherf-iiih  he  pvjlve  inhfi'njir'k^ 
mentality  ?' Vtx 

And  I  think  that  is  out  of  doubt,  if  my  former  arguing  have 
proved  that  faith  is  not  pallive  at  alitor  if  1  next  prove  that  faith 
is  no  phyjical infrftment.  Cut  yet  if  I  (liould  grant  both  that 
faith  is  pji/}»V?,  and  that  it  is  an  Inftrument^  yctmuft  I  have 
either  more  or  lefs  Logick  before  I  can  believe  that  \z  is  pafsive 
in  its  inflrumentalitj . 

My  reafons  againft  it  are  thefc.  1.  Every  Inftramental 
caufc  is  an  efficient  caufe :    but  all  tra?  efficiency  is  by  aftion  .• 

there- 


2o8) 


tberefore  all  inftrumentality  is  by  z^'ion.Tlut  cJuftHt-^s  effi.icn- 
t:-i  ejl  Actio  ;  'S'  hac  ejl  form^  per  (juam  denorKinaUir  ejficiens\q  tit 
agent  (^  effiiiem  fttnt  idem^Scc.  1  have  been  caught  fo  oft  and  fo 
confideiKly  thiC  i  believe  it  ,    (^ov  oportet  difcentcm  credere)  : 
andthacby  Philofophers  ofno  mean  efteem.as  Snares:  Tcm.i. 
difp.   iS.j.lO  J4vel.  C^ietuph    l.g.ij.  \6.Conim.  (^olleg.  Ployf* 
i- Z.'g.    6.  ar:.  -1.  cj^'j.  Scnliqtr.   Izxer  it.  2^-^.   A^Hinis^^^vio^ 
Perrece, MeUnUk, Zwichmi^Zuhirel,  Pererifn.Schihler^  Scierias^ 
Ctt.  Temped,  in  Kam.     with  many  more.    And  if  there  b»' no 
fucli  ihin^rnre'^urft  natura  as  i  Pafjive  iftli>tf»feKt,  chen  faith  is 
none  fuch.    I  know  Kccl^erm.   Aljied.  &  Bargerfdiciys  do  talk 
of  a  Paifive  inftrument  ;    but  I  think  m   proper  fpcech  it  is  a 
contradidion,in  adjectoznd  fay  as  Schlhler  Metapkyfl.i  sAp.ii. 
Tit   y.p,  3»l  9.  Nift  Actionem  propriam  hiberet  In^rumenttan,  ef~ 
ficiens  noa  ejfet-^  ^  proindep^fnvum  in(lri4mini.umtj(toi  Ktckerm. 
voCAt,  reverainlirHmentum  nonefi.    £c  at  Idem  ^Topc  ctp.   2. 
mtm.  34.  InjlrHmentumtotHmhoc  hahet ijuid  ad caufam  (ffi.ien' 
tern  adJHvantem  (adqujim  referimus  c.iufam  infirumentalem)  re- 
ejuiritHr.    R^tio  enim  communis  ilUrumefi  hx'.     1>efervire  ope- 
rationi  principxhs  aeey,tii  per  ulteriorem  operationem.    Et   Idem, 
Topic.cap.z.yiHitJ.  6.  i^er.  An  efficient!^  Caf*fitIitMlAdio   ?  Refp. 
dtA  ponitur  in  Theor.  56.  &  fen  tit  it  a  hsdie  (.M^xim^  pars  Lagi- 
arum  &  'J\teti'^phy[i:arHmJ''tde  ultra  pro  confirmAtiane  ai  nu.g., 
Stceiiim  cap.  3.  ««wi.i  ?<?.     So  that  if  wo/?  LogiciMs  judge  that 
there  is  no  paflive  inftrument,  and  confequently  that  faith  is  no 
paf^ive  inftrument,  then  who  is  morefingular,  you  oc  I  ?   For 
iwct^Nihil e'j}  falfum  inTheologis^  cjuodvirHmefi  in  Philofophia. 
I  deny  not  but  the  r»ul  in  bciievin^^  is  both  Pafsive  and  inflru- 
roentaljbuc^infevejalrelpfccs :  as  if  C4«;f>-t-*j  way  (hould  hold 
of  irifufing  grace  into  tne  will  /lleiiante  afdioneintelU3.us,i\i<.n 
the  intelktc  would  be  Pa/sivc  pJI£cc^"fving  [?racerntp  jt  felf ,  and 
an  in{}rHme>:t  orc'\nveying  ic  to  the  will  :    but  :hcn  \t  would  be 
noPdiVivebucan  Active  i-^lirument :    and  the  action  of  Godon 
the  Pafsive  intellect, nnd  of  the  intellect  on  the  will,are  two  Acti- 
ons with  dillinct  eff-'cts. 

2.  rhou{;h  there  were  fuch  a  thing  in  the  world. a&  a  P^iWe 
inftrument,  yet  that/^.f/a  Hiould  befuch,  and  \hupky/,caL^  I 
dare  fay  is  cither  an  unfic  aflertion,  or  clfc  I  am  of  »  ilupid.  a^- 

pre- 


(^op) 


prchcnfion.  For  there  rouft  be  found  in  it  fif it  were  fuch) 
thefefour  requifites.  i. There  rauft  be  a  phyfical  panionor  re- 
ception. 2.  A  pbyfical  efficiency;  5.  This  efficiency  muft  be 
■patier.do^  nottAgtndo.  4.  And  ir  muft  be  fuch  an  efficiency  a?  is 
proper  to  inftrument*.  1  may  nor  ftand  to  enquire  exactly  in- 
tocllchefe.  i.  The  firft  I  have  confuced  alrendy  ,  y.id  fn^il 
add  this  much  more.  i.  What  doth  faith  thus  receive  ?  2.  How 
doth  It  receive  it  >  3 .  Whence  ?  Or  from  what  Agent  and  Act  ? 
IT  's  it  Chrift  himfelf  that  is  ph^fically  received   by  Taich  ? 

1.  Who  dare  fay  fo,  hniih^Vhiquitanuns  ^  and  Trarfubibn- 
tiacionracn?  and  perhaps  not  they.  ChrilUs  in  Heaven,  and 
wcon  earth.  A  multitude  ofblafpbemers,  Libertines, and  Faml" 
lifts,!  lately  meet  with  that  dream  of  this,    but  no  lober  man. 

2.  And  indeed  if  Chritts  perfon  were  thus  received,  it  would 
not  make  a  man  righteous,  or  juOifie  hira.  As  all  our  Di- 
vinesfay,  his  bdng  in  the  body  of  ol/^r;  would  not  have  jufti- 
fiedher :  Nor  did  the  kiffing  of  h;s  lips  juftifie  Judas  ;  nor 
eating  and  drink'ng  inhii  prefence  juflifie  thofe  that  muft  de- 
part from  h\m  for  working  tniquity  ,  C^'IatthtVc  7.  If  we 
bad  fo  known  Chrift,  we  (hould  know  him  no  more  :  It  was 
neceflary  -to  hii  Difciples  thzt  he  ftiould  go  from  them  •  wc 
muft  not  have  the  Captrnaites  conceit  of  eating  hij  flcfti.  Yea, 
to  talk  ora;»/[^yyic^/ receiving  by  faith,  is  far  groflcr  :  For  the 
month  was  capable  of  that  phyHcal^contacc,  which  faith  is  not. 
3:  And  then  this  will  not  ftand  with  their  Judgement,that  blame 
me  for  making  Chrift  himfelf  the  object  of  juftifying  faith,  and 
not  the  promife  directly.  2.  If  yoo  fay  that  the  thing  received 
is  Chrifts  tightcoufnefs ,  (  as  moii  do  that  I  read  )  I  anfwer, 
I .  Righreoufncfs  is  but  t  relation :  And  therefore  a  thing  which 
is  naturally  uncapable  of  being  of  it  felf  phyfically  apprehend* 
ed.  This  is  part  doubf.  2.  If  it  be  phyfically  received,  then 
either  ai  a  principle  and  quality,  oris  anobject.  Notthefor- 
mer;  For  fo  wc  receive  our  firft,  (and  after/  grace  in  fancti- 
fication  ;  but  none  ever  faid  foin  Juftification  ;  Nor  indeed 
canchs:  (ighteoufnefs  which  is  formally  but  a  relation  ,  dwel 
in  us  as  a  principle  or  quality.  If  we  receive  it  as  an  objed  , 
then  by  an  Ad  :  Or  if  thc.foul  were  granted  to  be  pafsive 
in  reception  of  an  ob;e£^,  I  have  (hewed  that,  i.Itisbutfn  up*' 

Ee  ftthtH" 


QUO) 

frehenfionejtry)\>ltci :  None  pleadcth  for  more  :     But  faith  is  nor 
ruch.2.  And  (o  ic  would  receive  Chrift  no  otheiways  dienit  rc- 
ce;vech  anyobjcd  whatfoever  it  thus  apprebcndeth.     5.  And 
this  is  not  to  receive  Chrift  or  his  righteoulnefs,  but  the  meer 
fpecies  of  ic  according  to  your  own  Philolophers,   (  and  if  righ- 
tcoufne fs  be  but  a  relation ;    and  s  relation,  as   Darandu; ,  Dr. 
Tvlfs.^rA  n'.any  anoiher  think  bebuc£«/  R^tionu,    then  the 
fpeciesofan  £x/  Ratiotiu  is  a  very  curious  Web  J  Knowledge 
(iiS^iyOrhei/is  faith  in  i.fer.r.D>f.:\.  ^i. )  is  twofold,/,  c  Jen- 
fitive  and  intelle^ive  ^  and  each  of  thefe  twofold,  Intuitive  and 
yihftrallive.      Intuitive  hjiofvleige  is  indeed  de  ohjecio  Mt  in  fe 
prapnsi  <juando fcilicet  res  in pnpria  ex ift iritis  efl  ftr [emctiva  : 
Exempliim  dejenfitiva  ejl^tit  vijus  videtcolorem   :  (yet  this  is  but 
Recepiendo  fpeciem^    nonrem)    and  this  is  not  if  inqueftion^    ; 
Sxewplum  de  intellefiivA  eft ,  ut  vijio  Divift^  ejfentia  a  heatit  : 
This  is  utterly  denyed  to  be  at  all  by   Doctor  Stcu^kton^ 
Camer.  and  other  (olid  Divines,  agjinft  the  School- mens  judge- 
ment:    And  if  itbe^yctdoubtlefsasweknow  not  how,    fo  ic 
isnotfuch  as    faiths    apprehen^on,  which  we  enquire  after, 
Cognitio  AhftraHiva  eft  tjHando  (pedes  rei  movtt  adcognofcen- 
dum  remipfam^    &  hoc  ftveres  fit    i^  fe  frafens ,  five  ahfens^ 
Jive  ex  it}  at  five  non  :   Exemplum  in  fen  fitive  eft  ^    ttt  phantufia 
imaginatt*r  co/orem  :  Exemp/um    in   intelleHiva  eft  Ht  intelle- 
Huf  coq^nofcit  ^Hidditatent  color  is  medicantetjut  fpecit.     So  that 
if  it  be  either  of  ihefc,  ic  were  at  the  utraoft  but  a  paffive  rea- 
ception  of  the  fpccies,  and  not  of  Chrift  or    his   righte. 
oufncfs. 

2.  By  what  phyfical  contafl  faith  doth  receive  this  ?  might 
be  enquired  :  and?.  By  what  phyftcal  ad  ofthe  Agent?  to 
neither  of  which  queftions  can  I  ima^ne  what  tolerable  anfwcr 
can  be  given,  in  defence  oft  his  caufe. 

2.  And  if  faith  be  a  paffive  ;?)!»; //cjr//»/??-»«;f«/,  ic  mufl  have 
a  TbyficMl  Efficiency  ?  and  what  is  that  ?  to  juftihe  ?  why, 
even  God  himfclf  in  this  life  doth  that  but  by  a  Moral 
Ad  (by  his  word^  and  not  by  a  phyfical,  (as  to  parti- 
culars.) ^ 

3.  But  ihat  which  cJriveth  me  to  the  greatcft  admiration  is. 
How  faith  fhould ^j^crrf  patiendo  \    If  I  fliould  rip  up  this, 

or 


("hi 


or  require  a  dcmonftration  oFit  in  reiped  co  the  juftification  at 
judgement,  yea,  or  in  this  life,  yea  or  of  any  effed,  1  fhould 
lay  fuch  an  odium  on  it  from  its  abfurdicies,  that  in  dealing  with 
you,  modefty  doth  forbid  me  to  infift  on  it.  4.  The  fourth  re- 
quUicc  will  bt  enquired  after  in  thi  next  Q^eftion  favc 
one. 

The  fourth  Qucftion  is ,  fVkeiher  other  graces  may  not  he 
as  prof  erlj  called phyfical  pajfive  Infirnments  AS  Faith  ^  ij  y:ur 
fenfe  ? 

And  I  doubt  not  but  they  may,    /'though  its  true  of  nei- 
ther) For    I.  If  there   be  no   pbyfical  reception    of    Chrifls 
rightcoufnefs  imaginable  but  that  which   is  per   modum   ob- 
jeEii  ,    and  if   other   gracious    ads  have   Chrifts  rightcouf- 
nefs for  their  objed,    as  well  as  that  which  you  call  faith; 
then  other  Ads  do  receive  Chrills  righccoufnels  as  well  as  faith  : 
but  both  branches  of  the  Antecci-int  are  true,   therefore  the 
confequence,  the  bare  knowledge  or  llraple  apprehenfion  of 
Chrifts  rightcoufnefs  pvr  modum  chj(cti  may  better  pretend  to 
this,  then  recombency  or  affiance  ••     Yea,    and  love  it  felf 
more  fitly  then  affiance  may  be  faid  to  receive  or  embrace  its 
obiect  ('which  is  not  therefore  falfe  neither  becaufc  Bellarmins 
hath  it ;    and  you  know  he  brings  Atijli»es  plain  words,  affirra- 
ing    love   to   be  the   hand  by   which  they    received  him , 
C^rc. )     I  confefs   if    I    firft    renounce   not  the   concurrent 
Judgement  of  Philofophers,  I  cannot  approve  of  the  common 
Anfwcr  which  our  Divines  give  to  "Bellarmim  in  \\{\%^vi<.\That 
F.ith  rectiveth  Chrifts  Righteotifnefs  firfl  tomal^  it  ours  ^   hut 
Love  o>}/ J  to  retain  it  ^  and  embrace  and  enjoy  it  ^hen  fir/}  rvekr.ow 
it  to  he  ours :  ]]    For  though  this  fay  as  much  as  I  need  to  plead 
for,  acknowledging  Love  to  be  as  properly  aphyiical  Recepti- 
on for  retention,  as  Faith  is  for  firft  Poflef$ion,yet  if  affiance  be 
taken  in  any  proper  ordinary  fence,  it  cannot  thus  hold  good 
neither ;  for  fo  iA {fiance  muft  fignifie  feme  ad  of  the  will  irt 
order  of  nature  after  love,  or  at  leaft  not  before  ic    I  ackoow-' 
ledge  that  fo  much  of  Faith  as  lyech  in  the  underftanding  is  be- 
fore Love  in  order  of  nature ;  Jicnt  tpfeintelle^Hs  tji  ftmpltciter  _ 
prior  voluntate.at  motivum  mobili^&  aSlivumpaJJivo^  »r  Aquin. ' 
i.q.$.  2.a.  5.a.4«</i2.  qi  5.  a.  i.CFor  as  he,  IntelUSlas  efi  ^ 

£  e  2  primnm 


(zu) 


fr'muiTt  motivum  om?.if4m potemiariufinnimd  fUfaJ deterpmnat:- 
mem  mBus^  voluntM  vtrh  ijfead  exercitium  4tht$^  A  quin,i  2.  <y. 
17.4  I.e.  But  for  the  acts  of  the  will  toward  Chrift,  I  could 
j^ive  you  (  bat  co  avoid  tedioufnefs  I  muft  forbear  )  at  large  the 
Teftimony  of  ^-^^uinxs,  Tolet^  CJerfon^  Ct^mery,  AmfftHf,Zun' 
€hiuSf  Rolf.  Baronius^  Bra^vardint-^  Ruvio^  Vt^ueriMS^  &€.  \  hat 
Love  is  not  only  the  firH  of  all  the  Paftion«,but  cver^ihe  firft  mo- 
tion of  the  Will  towards  its  Objcct.and  little  or  nor  at  all  diffe- 
rent from  Volttio*ty  dUigere  being  bur  tttenftve  vtl't.  I  have 
mucii  more  to  fay  to  this,  which  here  I  muft  pretermit.  But  ft<U 
I  fpeak  not  of  Love  as  a  Pafsion,  but  atraeclofure,  as  ic  were 
of  the  will  with  its  Object  as  Good  ;  and  expect  love  to  be  pro- 
per to  the  fenfitive,  and  ftrangcto  the  intellective  foul;  we 
rau^  make  it  the  fame  with  Vtlle  •  For  Amor  ^  ^nndinmin 
f'tjntum  fign't^C4tnt  AElm  affttitusfenfitivi^fAfnontsfunt  -^(jton 
suttm  ffcmndum  quod  filnific ant  Aflus  afpanHs  wttllttHvi,in' 
f  tfi/ Aquins.  1  .f .2.<».  I .  I . 

The  fifth  Qucftion  i«,  tvlotther  Faith  be  amy  Infirument  of  cur 
Jiili:fic:ttio»  .' 

Anfwer,  Scoftu  gives  many  fences  of  the  word  JKfirumtnt, 
•  nd  fo  doth  tyf(jMhM,  Scbihler  ^  and  moft  Philofophera  that 
meddle  with  it :  and  they  give  forae  fo  large,  as  contain  tii 
caufes  in  the  world  under  God  the  firft  caufe;lo  fo  Urge  a  fence, 
if  any  will  call  faithanlnftrumcnt  of  JufliHcation  ,  I  will  not 
contend  with  him  i  though  yet  I  will  not  fay  fo  my  fcif  ,  af 
judging  faith  to  be  no  kind  of  caufe  of  it  at  all;but  in  the  proper 
ordinary  fence,  as  an  Inftrument,  lignifieth  (^^ufamqua  ittfivit 
iaejfeetum'ptr  vtrfuttm  inferioris  rationis^at  Sxi^Tt^fSt\Cx'\\U, 
Arnifaeus,  &c.  Vel  hflrttmentum  tfi  quod  fx  dire^hm  aJttrim 
frincipalis  Mgentit  injlttit  ad  prodweidum  tjfectHm  jt  uobiiioremy 
atrSchiblcr,  (^c.  So  I  utterly  deny  Faith  to  be  an  Inftrument. 
But  I  will  firft  queftion  whether  it  be  a  phyiical  Inflrument. 
2.  Whether  a  moral  ?  i.  Aiyl  for  the  firll ,  I  have  done  ic 
already:  for  feeing  our  acute  Divines  have  ceafed  to  lay  any 
claim  to  it  as  an  allivt  Inftrument,.but  only  a«  a  Pafive  ^  there- 
fore having  difproved  what  they  clairfrl  have  done  enough 
cothat.  2.  Yet  I  will  add  fome  more  :  And  i.  If  itbeaphy- 
l^caUftive  Inftrument,  it  muft  hare  a  phydcal  at^ive  Influx  to 

the 


(2.13) 

{fie  producing  of  the  EfFeft  ;  but  (o  hath  not  Faith  to  the  pro- 
ducmgof  our  Juftiiicacion.  Ergo  &c.  The  Major  is  apparent 
from  the  corr  men  definicion  of  (t?ch  Inftruments .-  The  Minor 
will  be  as  evident^  if  weconfidcr  but  what  Gods  AcSin  Judi- 
Hcation  is,  and  then  it  would  appear  impoffible  that  any  ad  of 
ours  fhould  be  fuch  anitftrumenr.  i.  Acihe  great  Juftification 
at  Judgement  Chnfts  ad  is  tofentcnce  us  acquit  and  difchar- 
ged:  and  doth  our  Faiih  aBive,  [nt  ir.p^tre  ad  httr.c  tffectum  } 
DothitincervenebetwetnChriliand  theeffeift  ?  and  fo  aftivc- 
ly  juftific  us  ?  Who  w  il  fay  ("o  ?  2»  And  the  act  by  whic  Ii  God 
jullificch  us  hcre,is  by  a  Deed  of  im'xk  in  his  Gofpcl/'as  1  Judge) 
Now  I.  That  doth  immedi>ucly  produce  the  effect  (  orily  fup- 
f/ofing  Faith  as  a  condition.  )  2.  .-  nd  it  is  but  a  moral  Inltiu- 
mental  caufe  it  fclf,  ard  how  fathcan  be  a  Ph^lical,  1  know 
not.  J.  Nay  the  a  A  if  bac  a  n-.oral  act ,  fuch  a-  a  Stature 
or  Bond  actetb,  and  what  need  Faith  to  be  2  phyHcal  Inltru- 
inenc? 

2.  My  fecord  Reafon  is  this  :  Ins  generally  concluded, that 
TetsinlirttmtKttcait/MirM  iji  inufu  c-r  afflicAtior,e\  It  ceafeth 
to  be  an  Inltrurnent,  when  it  ceafeth  to  be  ufed  or  acted  by  the 
principal  caufe  .•  But  faith  doch  moft  frequently  ceafe  its  action, 
and  is  not  ufed  (  pbyrically)whcn  we  flcep  or  wholly  mind  other 
things  :  Therefore  according  to  this  Doctr.ne,  faith  ftiould 
then  ceafe  it»Inftrumcntality;and  conffquently  either  we  Hiould 
ail  that  while  be  unjuftificd  and  unpardoned,  or  elfe  be  juftified 
and  pardoned  forae  other  way,  and  not  by  faith.  All  which  is 
abfurd  ;  and  eafily  avoided  by  difcerning  faith  to  be  but  a 
Condition  of  our  JuftiHcation,  or  tCaufa  ft>.t  cjua  non. 

5.  If  Faith  be  a  phyficsl  Infirumtnt^  then  it  fliould  juftitie 
from  a  reafon  intrmfecal^  natHval  .'«c^  tfeMttal  to  it,  and  not 
from  Gods  meer  ordination  of  it  to  this  office  by  hs  Word  of 
Promife  ;  but  that  were  at  leaft  dangerous  Doccrine  .-  and 
fhould  not  be  entertained  by  them  who  (truly)  acknowledge 
that  itjultifies  not  as  a  work  ^  much  Icfstiren  asa  Phftcalxt- 
ception  which  they  call  its  Inftrument-lity.  The  ccnfequencc 
of  the  Major  is  evident.inthat  nothirgcir.be  more  intnnfecal 
and  cffentialto  faith  f  this  faith  )  then  to  be  what  it  is,  t//«.  a 
Reception  or  acceptance  of  Cbrift  or  bit  Righteoufnefs :  thcre- 

Ec  J  fore 


a 


fore  if   ic  juftific  directly  as  fuch,  then  it  jaftifieth  of  its  own 
Nature. 

4.  It  is  to  meahardfaying,  that  God  and  Faith  do  the  fame 
thin|5,  {hat  is.  Pardon  and  jailiHe  :  and  yet  fo  they  do  if  it  be 
an  Inllrument  oi  Juiiificacion  :  ror  eadem  efl  Actio  Infiruruenti 
0"  yrir,ci^aU<  cau[£,  V;Z.  qitoad  dettrmimtionem  ad  httnc  ef' 
feSlttm,  ut  Aquinas,  Schibler,  e^c.  I  dare  not  fay  or  ihinlf, 
that  Fai:h  doth  fo  properly ,  effectively  juftifie  and  pardon 
us. 

5.  It feems  tome ncedlef^i to  feign  this  Inftrumentality,  be- 
CZ\x(tfrufira  fit  per  plitra  (j nod  fieri  pot efi  per  paucisra. 

6.  Vca  it  derogateth  from  the  work  j  for  as  Scotus  faith,  (  in 
4.  dift.  45.  q.  I.  pag.  (  miht  )  239.  D.  )  Actio fitte  inflrumento 
eft  perfectior quttft  actio  cttm  iadrumento. 

7.  And  this  Doctrine  makes  miziiohtlhtcaHJaproxima,  of 
faisown  Pardon  and  Juftiticacion.  For  it  is  man  that  believes  and 
not  God:God  is  the  can/a  pri*na^buz  mtn  the  ca»faproxima  cre- 
aendiy  and  fo  of  iuftifying,if  Faith  be  an  Inftrument  Or  at  leaft 
man  is  a  caufe  of  his  own  Pardon  and  Juftification.  Yea  faith  b?- 
ing  by  Divines  acknowledged  our  own  I  nftrumcnr,it  muft  needs 
follow  that  we  juftifie  and  forgive  our  felves.  Dr.  .^wf^wj  faith, 
{"Bellar.  £r2ervat.To.4.\[6,p.(m\h\)^i').)PIf4rimf{mrefert:^uia 
fcfit  (acramentA  (judmvis  alicjuofnfttpofsir.t  did  In^rumentA  no- 
ftra^  &c.  priprie  tamenfiint  f-nflyumtnta  Dei:ftc  etiam  fides  cffnani' 
n/ispofsit  vocari  hftrumentiim  Dei,  cjaia  Deus  jttfiificat  nos  ex  fi- 
de &  per  fidem,  prtprietamen  efl  InfirfimentHmnojirHm.  Deus 
190s  biptizit  (^  pafctt,  non  nofmet  ipji :  Nos  creciimHS  in  Chri^um^ 
non  Dens.  Whether  faith  may  be  a  moral  Inftrument,  I  (hall 
enquire,when  1  have  anfwercd  the  next  queftion ;  which  is,Q^6. 
//  faith  yvcreJHcha  Phjfical  Pafsive(or  Active)  Infirument, "Whe- 
ther th:tbe  the  formal  direct  reafqn  of  its  jttftifying  ?  and  rvhether 

{oiit  16  )  it  dojtiftifie  dinctlj  andprimart/yy  quatenus  cR  apprc- 
henfioChrifti,  juftitiae^vel  Juftificationis.  And  this  is  it  that  I 
molt  confidently  deny.and  had  rather  you  would  flick  to  in  de- 
bate then  ail  the  reft  :  for  I  ground  many  other  things  on  it.I  af- 
6rm  therefore,  i .  That  faith  juftifierh  primarily  and  directly,  as 
the  condition  on  which  the  free  Donor  hath  beftowed  Chrift, 
with  all  his  benefits  in  the  GofpeFconvcyance.  2.  And  that  if  it 

were 


C^'O 


were  a  meer  Phyfical  apprchenfion  ic  would  not  juftifie;  nO  nor 
do  us  any  good.  3.  And  rhac  theapprehenlion  called  rhe  recep- 
tivity whicn  IS  truly  its  nature, is  yet  but  its  aptitude  co  its  juftify- 
in^  otficCjandfo-a  remote,  &:  notthe  direft  proper  formal  caulc. 
iheJe  three  1  will  prove  in  order.    1.  And  f.)r  the  firft  it  is 
proved,     i.  From  the  Tenor  of  the  jul^ifynig  l^romife,  which 
Itill  afTurcth  Juftification  on  the  condition  ot  Bdievmg.    []  He 
that  believeth~]  and  [_  rvh'^ fever  believith'^M-\d  [_  if  thou  he- 
iieve^  do  pliuily  and  ur.queftionably  exprcis  fuch  a  condition, 
upon   which  we  (hall  be  jullified,  and  without  which  weftiall 
no:.     The //«rf«i7/wM«;  moft  unreaionAbiy  deny  this.     2.  And 
the  nature  of  Judification  makes  it  unqucltioinable  :  for  whe- 
ther you  make  ic  a  Law-ad,   or  an  ad  of  Gods  own  Judge- 
ment and  Will  determining  of  our  ftate,  yet  nidierwill  admic 
of    any  intervening caufc,  (  cfpecially  any  ad  of  ours,  )  but 
only  a  condition.     ".  Befidep,  Conditions  depend  on  the  will 
of  him  that   beftowcth  the  Gift,  and  accordmg  to   his  Will 
ihey  fuccecd  ;  but  Inftrumencs  more  according  co  their  own 
fitncfs :  Now  it  is  known  well,  that  Juftihcation  is  an  ad  of 
Gods  meer  free  Grace  and  Will,  and  therefore  nothing  can 
further  conduce  to  Gods  free  act  as  on  our  parr,  but  by  way  of 
Condition.  4.  And  I  need  not  fay  more  to  this, it  being  acknow- 
ledged generally  by  all  our  D. vines,  not  one  that  I  remember 
excepted,  bcfides  Mr.  fVulkjcr^  that  ifAth  jn^ifieth  as  the  condi- 
tion of  the  Covenaya^  Mr.  f^l'otton  de  Reconcil.  p4r.  i.  /,  2.  cap.  1 8. 
brings  you  the  full  Teftimony  of  the  En^Hfh  Homilies.    Fox^ 
Terl^iKj,    Paratu^    Trelcatins^  ''Dr.  G.    ^j^natf,  Sch^rpifts^ 
Th.   CMatthtm  y    Calvin^    Aretitis^  Sadeel  ^  OUviun  ^   CMe- 
lancth,     Be^a  .:   To  which  I  could  add   msny  more  :  and  I 
never  fpoke  with  any  folid  Divine  that  denyed  it. 

2.  Now  thata  phyfical  apprchenfion  would  not  juftifie,  as 
fuch,  is  evident,  i.  Elfe  /Uary  (hou\d  be  juftificd  for  having 
Chriftinhcr  womb,  as  I  faid  before.  2.  Elfe  juftificati- >n» 
aslfaid,  fliouldbeafcribcd  totbenatureof  the  act  of  faithic 
felf.  3.  You  may  fee  what  is  the  primary,  formal  reifun  why 
faith  luftihcs,  by  its  infeparablilicy  from  the  effect  or  event  ^ 
and  which  is  the  improper  remote  caufe  by  it?  fepuab;!!  y. 
Now  fuch  a  phyfical  apprehcnfion  may  be  Cas  fuchj  fepar  red 

from 


itd) 


from  the  CJffecf,  and  would  Hill  be  if  ic  had  not  the  further  na- 
ture of  a  condition.     We  fee  it  plainly  in  all  worldly  thing?. Eve- 
ty  man  chat  take;  in  h^s  hand  a  conveyance-  of  land,  (hall  not 
pofTefs  the  land.     If  you  forcibly  feiz-;  upon  all  a  raan«  eviden- 
ces and  writing?,  you  fha!l  not  therefore  p^fTefs  hiseltafe.     If 
a  traytor  fnatch  a  pardonby  v  olcnceourofanothcrfhand,    he 
isnot  therefore  pardoned.     (But  more  of  ohis  under  the  next\ 
4.  And  for  your  piilivefairh,  I  cinnot  conceive  how  it  fhould 
^as  pifllivej  havr  any  Moral  good  in  it  Casisfaid,)  much  lefs 
juftifieu?.     And  lb  when  God  faith  that  wichout  fai:h   it  is 
impofiibleto  pieafe  God  we  fliall    feign   that  co  be  jj'lifying 
faith,    which  hath  nothing  in  it  fclf,   that  can  pleafe  God  :  and 
how  it  can  juftifie  that  doth  not  pleafe,  I  know  not.     I  know 
i*i  ^e»tre    entit    the  Divels   peafe  God    j      They  are   hii 
creatures  ;  and  naturally  Good  ,  as  Ens  &boKMm  convertHn' 
tHr  :     h\ii  in gentrtmoyif^  1  know  no!    yet  how  p^i  (juatemdt 
pati  can  pleafe  him.     For  it  doth  not  require  fo  much  as  lib;fr- 
ty  of  the  will  :     The  reafon  of  Paffion  is  from  the  Agent  :   As 
^Hflrez  dif.   17.  vj.  2.    Stcunium  frtcifas  rationts  formnfet  U- 
tjMtndo^  Pajfto  tji  ab  ACfiont  :   ^  non  i  convnft.     lieoqite  vt- 
rA  e(h  i^  propria  hdc  CAufalU  locutio^    Qui*  agtns  agh ,    nutteria 
recipit.     Now  fure  all  Divines  as  well  as  the  free-will  men  , 
do  acknowledge,  that  there  can  be  no  pleafing  worth  or  ver- 
tue,  where  there  is  not  liberty.    And  SnanK.  faith  truly  in  that 
(T.  idiff.  19   pil-imiht)  1^0.)  '^AMimui  vtrohancfacMltA' 
lem  i}ffAttnti4  Itbtra  tfl ,  non  pojfe  (jfe  n  ji  /i£iiv4m-  ffue  converfo 
f<tcutcatem  non  fojfe  efe  liber  am  ^  nififtt  aSiivai^^Harmus  ahi- 
V4  eft.     Proba'ttrftc  .    N^m  TaiJJo  ut  Pdjfio  nonpotefl  ejfe  Libc" 
r A  patient i\  fedJolH/ntjuatenfU/^^iodjua  t*lii  PaJJia  provtmt 
illiefi  lihtra:     Srgo  LibfrtAsformahteracprAcifenon  tfl  in  po- 
ttr.Uip^ritnte^  Ht  fic^  fed  in  foi€Kt  a  Ageme.  {Fide   ultra  pro' 
bationcm.') 

5,  Yea  I  .Tiuch  fcsrleft  this  Paffive  Dodrine  do  lay  all  the 
blame  of  all  m?ns  infidelity  upon  (Jod,  orraoftat  Icaft  :  For 
it  raiketh  ihc  unbeliever  no  otherwife  faulty  then  a  hard  block 
for  refifting  the  wedge  which  is  but  by  an  indifpcfition  of  the 
matter.-  and  fo  Oug  rail  indifpofirion  is  allrhe  (%n.  For  as 
^^tf  in  M  faith  ^     Mid  am   ta  Paticnte   t;?   vel  »bt  rp.rfiUione^ 

vtl 


(^'7) 


vel  dcfeCl^t    agent U  y    vsl   indifpajittjne    CMAterU.  r.  f.  ^\ 
ti,i.  c. 

3.  My^hird  propofiiioni^jthat  ihz  Ke:tpi'v't)  cr apprehenjia  t 
wkich  it  trnl"^  of  the  nature  of f.utloi  it)  it  h'Atiti  aptitude  to  ift 
ff*Jfif)i^^officef  A^idfo  a  remote  Afid not  the    direct  prcpsr  formal 
rea/on  :     And  tins  is  the  main  point  that  I  ir.fift  on  ;     And  it  is 
evidenr,    in  all  chat  is  faii    already  .•    and  further  thus,     if 
faith  held  been  of  that  apprehending  nature  as  it  is,  and  yet  had 
not  been  made  the  condition  in  th€  gift  or  promifc  of  God,  it 
would  not  have  juftified  :  but  if  it  had  been  made  thc.conditi- 
on  ,  though  it  had  been  no  apprehending  (  buB  as  any  other 
duty,)  yet  it  would  have  juftified  ;  therefore  it  is  evident  that 
the  ncarcft,  proper  rcafon  of  its  power  to  juftifie  is  Gods  ma- 
king it  the  condition  of  his  gift,    and  its  receptive  nature  is  buc 
a  remote  reafon  ;     i  •  If  faith  would  hive  juftified  ,  though  it 
had  not  been  a  condition,  then  it  muft  have    juftified  againft: 
Gods  will,  which  is impoffible:  It  isCJod  that  juftifieth  ,    and 
therefore  we  cannot  be  a  caufeofhis  Adion.    2.  It  is  evident 
alfofrorathe  natureof  this  moral  reception,  which  being  buc 
a  wiliingnefsandconfent ,    cannot  of  its  own   nature   mjkc 
the  thing  our  own,  buc  as  itisby  thcmeer  will  of  the  donor 
made  the  condition  of  his  offeror  gift.     If  I  am  willing  to  be 
Lord  of  any  Lands  or  Countreys,  it  will  not  make  mf  fo  .-  but  if 
the  true  0i«<ncr  fay,  1  will  give  them  thee  if  thou  wilt  accept 
them,  ihenicWill  be  fo  :     therefore  it  is  not  firfl:  and  diredly 
from  the  nature  of  the  reception,but  firft  bccaufc  that  reception 
i?made  the  condition  of  the  gift.  If  a  condemned  mm  be  wil- 
ling 10  be  pardoned,  he  (hall  not  therefore  be  pardoned  ;  buc 
if  a  pardon  be  given  on  condition  he  be  willing  or  accept  it, 
then  he  (hall  have  it.    If  a  poor  woman  confent  to  have  a 
Prince  for  herhusbard,  and  fo  to  have  his  pofle/Tions,  itfliall 
not  therefore  be  done,  except  he  give  himfelf  to  her  on  condi- 
tion of  her  confent.     If  it  were  a  meer  phyfical  reception,  and 
wcfpoke  ofa  poflefnon^f/^iffo  offomcwhac  that  is  fo  apprc- 
henrible,thenit  would  be  otherwife  :   as  he  that  getteth  gold 
or  a  pearl  in  his  hand,  he  hath  fuch  a  pofTefsion  :  But  when  it  is 
bat  a  moral  improper  reception  ^though  fer   actum  phyficttm 
volendi  vtl  confentiendi) ,   and  when  we  fpcak  of  a  pofTefsion 

Ff  ifi 


CiiS) 


in  right  of  Law,  and  of  a  relation  and  Title,  then  it  niuftneeJ: 
ftand  asaforcfa  d.     Donanon,   (or  Imputation;  bcir^g  ihc  di- 
red  caufeofourh  ftconft  cucive  ju'.iifica:ion,thercforecondici- 
onalty  and  not  the  naturalreceptivity  of  faith,muft  needs  be  ihc 
proper  rcafon  of  its  juflifyinq.This  is  acknowledged  by  Divines : 
AfKefftisWnh,  ("BelUrm.  Enervat.  T-  ^p.  (m  hi)  3 14.  Jppre- 
henfto  'jHJiiflcationi^  per  veram  fiiHciam^  »on  ffl  Jim^lictter  per 
ruodum  ohjectif  fed  permodumokjecti  nobii  donati:  !^:ltiod  enim 
*T>tU5  donaverit  fiilei'ihtts  (^hrifiHin  dr  ovir.i  /  cum  eo^  Scr'ipiurA 
di[ertiivtYb'^tefiatiir^Rom,%.%z.     2.    And  that  if  any  other 
fort  or  a^  of  faith,   as  well  as  this,  or  any  other  grjce  would 
have  juf^ifiedjif  God  had  made  it  equally  the  conaition  of  his 
gift,  isalfopaft  alldoubr.     i.  Becaufe  the  whole  work  of  Ju- 
Itifyingdependethraeerly  on  Gods  free  Grace  and  will,    and 
thence  it  is  that  faith  is  deputed  to  its  office.     2.  who  do^bceth 
but  God  could  have  beftowcd  pardon  and  juftiricaiion  on  other 
terms  or  conditions,    if  he  would  ?     3.  Yea  who  doubtctli 
but  he  might  have  given  them  without  any  condition ,  even  that 
of  acceptance  ?     Yea  though  we  had  never  known  that  there 
had  been  a  Redeemer, yet  God  might  have  juftified  us  for  his 
fake.     I  fpeak  not  what  he  may  now  doafrer  he  refolved  of  a 
courfe  in  his  Covenant:     But  doubtlcfshe  might  have  made 
the  Covenant  to  be  an  abfolute  promife  without  any  conditi- 
on on  our  part  if  he  would,   even  fuch  as  the  Antinominns 
dream  it  to  be.     And  me  thinks  thofe  great  Divines  ,   that  fay 
with  Tivijfe^Chamier  ,   lyal^'n,    &c.    rhat  God  might  have 
pardoned  us  without  a  Redeemer,  fhould  not  deny  this  efpeci- 
ally.     4.  And  doubclefs  that  faith    which  rhe   Ifraelites  in  the 
firftagesweie  juftified  by  ,   did   much  differ  from  ours  now. 
whatever  that   doth  which  is  requTed  of  poor  Indians  now  ^ 
that  never  heard  of  Chriih    5      And  God  pardoneth  and  ju- 
ftifieth  Infants,  w.thouc  any  adua!  reception  of  pardon  by  their 
faith. 

2.  And  nre  thinks  they  that  ftand  for  the  inftrumentality 
of  faith  above  all  flijuld  not  deny  this ;  for  (according  to  my 
Logick)  rhc  formality  of  an  Inf^rnment  is  in  its  adual  fub- 
fcrviency  to  the  principal  caufe  :  and  therefore  it  is  no  lon- 
ger caufainflrHmcntdlii  then  it  is  ufed  :    and.thercfori:  wkaifoc- 

ver 


(ZIc^) 


vcr  is  the  »3^?fn4  of  the  iuftrumenc,  or  whatfoever  is  natural 
toir,  cannot  be  its  form  :  Now  to  be  a  reception  or  appre- 
henfion  of  Chri!!:,  is  moft  clfcnrially  niturai  to  this  ad  of  faiCh, 
an  J  therefore  cannot  be  (he  form  of  its  inftrumencalicy.  For  as 
Scc/itijhhh  (i»  JSf.fcy.t.cii'}.\.q.%.  Fol.  {mitsi )  I  ^.H.)  >nltrn. 
mentiidonejt  IS  f  etc  edit  natural  iter  ufftm  ejus  ut  inflrumeKtum. 
And  what  is  the /^i/^Tft'^/ or  ^ijpriV^^r  of  faith  but  this?  And 
as  Scot  us  /^tci.Uith,  Nullum  uiJlrHmentttm  formaUttr  eft  ideo  ap  • 
turn  ad  tifuniy  quiaalicjnis  uritur  eo  utinjlrnmeKto  :  butic  is  an 
Inftrament^wM  ah^uis  fit:tfir,(^c. 

?.  And  if  the  reception  were  the  moft  dircd,  .proper  caufe, 
f  efpccialiy  if  the  phyfical  reception)  then  it  would  follow, 
chat  julUfying  faith  i  as  fuch)  is  the  receiving  of  juftification  , 
or  of  Chrifts  rightcoufnefs,  bu:  nor  t!ic  receiving  of  Chrift  him- 
felf,  or  that  the  reccivingof  Chrilt  wculd  be  but  a  preparato- 
ry art,wh:ch  i^i  I  dare  fay  foul  and  falfe  Dodr.ne,  and  contrary 
to  thcfcope  of  Scripture  which  makes  Chri!^  himfelfche  objcd 
of  this  faith  ;  and  the  receiving  of  ^/w  ( fohn  i.ii,  12.)  and 
believing  mLtmiobe  the  condition  of  juftification  ;  and  the 
reccmng  oiri^htconfnefs^  but  fecondarily  or  remotely,  ^me- 
fitis  h'llh  (ubi  fffpra  )  hie  tamen  obfervaH^um  e't  .'ccurate  lo- 
tjuendo^  appreheijiojem  Chrifi  ^  jujlidx  ejus  ejfe  fidem  j^fti' 
ficantenfy  ^aia  jiffiificatio  no/Ira  exftrgit  tx  apprehenfto^e  Ckri' 
flit  C^  apprehen  '0  juflijicationM  ut  pojfejfioni^  noflr<tpra(tntis^ 
frkUm  eft  ^  fffcdttm  apprebeKfienispriiris,  So  in  his  Medulla 
he  makes  Chrilt  himfelf  theobjed  of  juftifying  faith. 

4.  Al'o  if  the  fiid  reception  were  the  immediate  proper  rea- 
fon  why  faith  juftifycth  •  then  it  would  follow  that  it  is  one  ad 
of  faith  whereby  we  are  pardoned  (  viz  the  reception  of  par- 
don )  and  another  whereby  we  are  jnftified  (  viz,,  the  Recep- 
tion either  of  righteoufnefs  or  juftification  :  ij^and  there  muft 
be  another  act  pffaithforAdoption,and  another  for  every  other 
ufe  according  to  the  variety  of  the  Objects.  But  this  is  a  vain 
fiction  ,  it  being  the  fame  believing  in  Chrift,  to  which  the  Pro- 
mife  of  llemifsion,  Juftificition,  Adoption,  Giorification.and 
all  is  made. 

Alfoii  would  contradid  the  Doctrine  of  our  beft   Divines, 
who  fjy^-'.s  A'jle  dltispiflinB.  Theol.  C.  ly.p.Ji.    that  Chrift  is 

Fl  2  oar 


(zzo) 

our  Righteoufnelis  w/i?m/«  CAuU'i ,  ftd  non  infenfu  formaVi.     I 
conclude  this  with  the  plain   reftimonyot  our  beft  Writers, 
ff/i^iwi  vol.  I.  pag  662.    Intht  true  Gai'j^fiith  :    ArJlejlany 
(hould  tmagint  thiit  the  very  A7t  of  faith  iiapprehendirg  Chrift 
juflifcth  :    rve  are  to  uneierjiand  that  faith  doih  not  app^  ehenl  bj 
PoTvir  from  it  ftlf,  but  bj  virtue  of  the  Covenant.     If  a  man 
believe  the  Kingdom  of  France  ro  behi^^  it  isnot  therefore  hu  : 
yet  if  he  beltveChrifi  and  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  by  Chrifi  to  be 
hii    ft  is  his  inieed  :  not  Jimply  bccafife  he  believes^  bnt  becaufe 
ke  believes  upon  Comwandment  and  Promife.     (  cha:  is  not  pro- 
perly as  an  Inftruracnt,  but  as  a  condition  )  For  in  tie  tenor  of  the 
Covenant  Qod  promifeth  to  imppite  the  Obedience  of  Chrift  to  »s 
for  our  Rtghteoufnefs  if  roe  believe.     Is  not  this  as  plain  as  may 
be?    So  Bullinger  Dee^d.    I.  Serm6.  p.  (mihi)^^.      fVe  fay 
faith  JHJiifiethfor  ifj«lft  »^'  <*'  ^^  *'  <*  quality  in  our  mind,  or  our 
trvn  Vcork^:  but  as  faith  is  a  gift  of  C/ods  grace^  having  the  pro- 
mife of  righte^ufnefs  and  itfe:dcc.     Therefore  faith  jujiifieth  for 
Chri^f  and  from  she  grace  and  Covenant  of  Qod. 

This  being  therefore  fully  provcd,ihat  faith  juftifieth  properly 
and  diredly  as  the  conditton  on   which  God  hath  made  over 
Chrift  and  all  his  benefits  in  the  Gofpel,    the  two  great  points 
oppofed  in  my  Dodrine  do  hence  arife  unavoidably,  i  .That  this 
fttith  juftifieth  as  truly  and  dirediy  as  it  is  the  receiving  of 
Chrift  for  Lord, and  King,  and  Head,  and  Husband,   as  for  a 
juftifier,  for  both  arc  equally  the  conditions  in  the  Gofpel.  But 
if  the  phyfical  Inftrumcntal  way  were  found,  then  it  would  jufti- 
fieonlyasit  is  a  receiving  of  Juftification  or  Juftice.     This  is 
the  main  condufion  I  conttft  for.    Yield  me  this,  and  I  will  not 
fo  much  fticlj  at  any  of  the  reft.     2.  And  hence  it  follows,  that 
Repentance,  forgiving  others,  love  to  Chrift,  Obedience  Evan- 
gelical, do  fofiir^ftifie  as  the  Gofpel- promife  makes  them  con»- 
ditions ;  and  no  further  do  I  plead  for  them. 

7.  My  laft  Queftion  was,  fVhether  now  jour  DoSiriyig  or  mine 
bethemore  ebfcHrei  doubt  full  and  danger  ous?  And^l'ich  is  the 
more  clear  ^  certain  and  fife  ? 

And  here  I  fhall  firft  fliew  you  yet  more  what  my  Judge- 
ment is,   and  therein  whether  Faith  be  a  moral  Inftrumeht, 
I  think  that  cofidirio  fne  qtta  non,  non  potefl  efft  efficiens,  quia 

h'fjuj 


(2-2.1)  • 

hnjus  nulla  ejl  aFlio  ;  nee  id  aci  ch]us  fr^fentUm  ali^uid  co>Jtigit 
cttra  ilitus  actionem  :  r.ec  material!*  dtfpojitio  eft  Iyjjirumentnm^ 
&c.  ut  Schtbler^  Top.c.  -^.pa^.ioz.  Even  ihe  Gofpe!-Pro- 
mife,  wtiich  is  far  more  properly  called  Gods  moral  Inrtrumenc 
of  juftitying  or  pardoning,  is  yet  but  Ibmewhatto  the  waking, 
up  that  fundumentum,  from  whence  the  relation  of  y-<(itfitd 
doth  refulc  And  the  Fun^dmotttiM  is  called  a  caufe  of  the  ic- 
htion  which  arifeth  from  it  without  any  ad,  but  what  went  to 
caufe  the  foundation,  even  by  ameer  refultancy,  as  ]y0rhilli4 
fully  in  1 .  fent.  d:ft.  i-j.ci.  i .  But  to  call  a  condition  in  Law  an 
Inftrnment^xi  yet  far  more  improper.  The  Law  or  Promife 
therefore  i  will  call  a  moral  Inlirument  ;  the  condition  which 
we  mud  perform,  I  will  not  call  a  moral  Inftrument,  cither  of 
the  Aft  which  God  performcth,  or  yet  of  the  effeift  which 
flowech  from  that  ad  immediately.  Yet  if  any  will  fay  that  it  is 
properly  and  principally  a  condition,  and  that  it  fo  juftifieth  ; 
and  yet  that  it  may  be  called  aninftrumcnt  moral  in  an  im- 
proper fence,  as  it  is  a  condition  firlt,  or  el fe  in  regard  of 
its  receiving  ufe ,  will  ftretch  the  word  In/irfiment  ib  wide, 
as  to  apply  it  to  it ;  I  will  not  con'cnd  for  a  word  ,  when  we 
agree  in  fence.  And  thus  Mr,  fVottov  yieldeth  as  with  an  ill 
will  to  call  it  an  fnftrumenr,  proving  it  firlt  to  juftilie  as  a  condi- 
tion.  But  I  am  loth  to  give  it  any  proper  caulaliiy  in  juftify- 
ing. 

And  now  let  us  fee  whofc  fence  W,  i .  More  obfcure.  I 
avoid  and  abhor  all  vain  niceties  in  fo  fundamental  a  point  as 
Juftification  is  ^  therefore  I  fay  plainly  but  Q  Tk^t  faith  is  the 
condition  on  which  CjodhAth  heflorved  C  hriji  and  all  hs  benefits  in 
the  Gofpel  ]  What  woman  cannot  underfland  thi<  at  a  word  ? 
But  your  DoArine,  what  Oedipus  is  able  to  unfold  ?  for  my  parr, 
it  is  quite  paft  my  reach  ;  and  mott  that  I  convcrfe  with,  areas 
filly  as  ray  felf.  Can  every  poor  man  or  woman  reach  to  know 
what  a  pajfive  ABiot^  or  a  pajjlve  Tafsion^  or  a  Pafuve  Infiru- 
mentis}  and  how  we  receive  Chril^,  as  a  man  takes  a  giftii 
his  hand?  or  to  fee  through  all  the  difficulties  that  I  have  difco- 
vercdherein  yourDodrine?  Even  they  that  raife  queftions, 
jphat  »ne  a£i  of  faith  doth  jfffttfie  ^  rthetherof  the  V/;derflaniing 
cr  Willi  Whtther  Jjetft  or  Jfi^nce^  &c.  Do  feem  vainly  and 

F  f  3  huK fully 


(12Z) 


burtfully  curious  tome  :  much  more  thofc  that  reduce  all  fo 
anunconc€ivab;e/?<jff.  i  plainly  therefore  affirm,  that  faith  is 
not  any  phyHcal  receiving,  C  as  the  hind  do:h  receive  money, 
as  you  would  af:crward  make  me  believe  the  AfTembly  mesns  ) 
but  a  Metaphorical  moral  receiving  :  and  that  it  is  not  by  any 
one  aft  of  the  foul  (much  lefs  a  Paffion  )  but  by  the  whole  foul, 
Underftanding  and  Will:  the  former  beginning,  the  later  con- 
limimiting  it,  (  tis  D,iv£»ant  foundly.  )  And  let  us  trye  by 
commonipeech,  which  of  tliefe  is  the  more  plain  and  probable 
fence.  Suppofe  a  Prince  wdl  redeem  a  Turkjjh  condemcd  flave, 
and  fend  him  word  Q  ^  h.we  bought  thee  ,  and  if  thou  ^Ht 
receive  (  or  take  )  me  for  thji  Redeemer^  Deliverer  And  Lord,  and 
for  the  fhture  vfiU  ferve  me  and  be  thankfu/l ,  /  tvi/l  aSltially  fet 
thee  free.  Here  «t  would  fure  be  a  filly  thing  to  fall  a  queftio- 
ning,  what  the  Prince  means  by  the  word  {^Receive  or  tnh  3 
Vv'hether  it  be  an  aft  of  this  faculty,or  that?  Whether  this  or  that 
aft  POr  whether  it  is  meerly  /^j/j?  Though  we  are  too  wife  to  un- 
derftand  this  now  ,  I  w,srrant  you  the  fooliflieft  flave  would 
foon  underftand  it :  and  know  that  to  receive  or  take  the  Prince 
for  his  Redeemer,  is  to  believe  him,  and  confent,  and  thankful- 
ly accept  of  him  as  he  requires,  and  of  deliverance  by  him: 
And  he  that  (hould  ask  him,  Whether  it  were  the  bare  aft  of 
affiancc,or  whether  gratitude  or  love  were  included  in  the  term? 
would  feem  but  fimple  to  him.  If  a  Prmce  will  deliver  a  con- 
demned woman  from  death,  and  off^^r  with  all  to  marry  her. and 
give  her  himfelf,  and  all  he  hath,  on  condition  fhe  will  receive 
or  take  him  for  her  husband, Cand  accordingly  be  a  faithfull  wife 
to  him  till  death)  He  that  (houid  here  ftcp  in,  and  raife  pro- 
found Scruples,  and  enter  difficult  difputes,  whether  this  recei- 
ving were  an  aft  of  the  Undei  (landing  or  Will  ?  Whether  Af- 
fiance, Recombency,  AlTurauce,  &C'  or  whether  a  Pafsion  ? 
would  be  well  judged  rid  cuious  •,  whcQ  every  man  knows  at  the 
firlt  word  what  it  is  for  the  won»an  to  receiy  or  take  a  man  for 
her  Husband,  even  gladly  and  lovingly  to  confent  and  accept 
the  offer,  and  tvith  all  her  heart  deliver  up  her  felf  to  him  ac- 
cordingly. So  if  a  King  of  another  Nation,  that  hath  right 
alfo  to  thU,  but  not  pofTefsion-,  (liculd  fend  to  us^to  charge  us  to 
receive  him  for  our  King;  v;hat  ahsrd  word  is  this  to  under- 
ftand? 


ftand  ?  or  doth  icfign'fieany  one  g;S?  or  the  ad  of  any  one 
linglc  faculty  that  the  people  of  the  iand  rnult  perform  ?  Oh 
how  too  learned  Divines  ('or  too  unlearned  j  have  puzzled 
and  amazed  poor  foul?,  and  muddyed  the  cle^r  flrcams  of  the 
Dodrineof  Chrill,  in  this  i^o  v.eighcyand  plain  a  point  of  jufti- 
Hcation?  in  a  word.  Sir,  I  know  there  is  never  a  ore  of  my 
Heirers  C2n  underltand  your  Dodrine  of  inflrumenrality  Aftive 
or  Pa  Hive,  nor  have  they  the  Logick  nectfiiry  ihercto,  ind 
therefore  I  will  not  fpcak  to  them  m  fuch  a  language.  Even 
while  1  uncyeyour  kno:s,  I  am  thought  a  Baybaiiyi^  and  noc 
undcrftood ;  how  much  more  if  I  fpcke  what  J  underftand 
not  my  felf  nor  am  ablc,though  I  fer  my  wits  on  the  tenter  ? 

2.  And  then  let  us  feewhicliis  ihc  truer  and certMner^yown 
Do(^rine  or  mine.  And  i.  I  have  faid  fomewhat  already  ro 
weaken  the  credit  of  yous.  2.  And  more  from  what  is  lail 
fiid  it  is  unlikely  to  me  to  be  true  becaufe  of  the  obfcurity  • 
for  I  believe  God  hath  fpoke  plainer  in  fundamentals,  and  non 
laid  folks  filvation upon  that  which  none  but  Scholirs  of  abet- 
ter or  worfe  judpemept  then  I  can  underftand.  I  know  there 
is  that  kind  of  difficulty  in  Divine  things  which  rcquireth  the 
Spiritual  illuminarion  of  the  underftanding  ,-  but  not  fuch  in  foun- 
dation points  that  necelf.irily  reqaireth  fo  much  humane  learn- 
ing. 3.  Your  way  hath  not  one  word  of  Scriprurefor  it :  Where 
doth  Scripture  fay  (m  phrafe  or  fenfe  j  that/«V^  }  nfiifiah  as  an 
i^'jlrnment ;  or  ihat  it  is  fuch  }  AHive  or  i'lijfne  !  Or  that  it  is 
this   or  that  only  AU  ? 

But  now  for  the  Doftrinel  teach,  i.  Neither  your  felf 
nor  any  folid  man  denycch  it  (^that  faith  is  ncorJition  an  J  fa 
jftfttfieth:  )  and  that  it  is  a  Afcrul  recciviKg,  and  by  the  vfhole 
[omI^  cfepcially  the  hartj  ccnfef^t,  and  acceptance  of  tke  rvi'.i  ^ 
molt  Divines  teach  ,  as  I  could  fhew  but  for  w.'ifting  time.  2.  I 
prove  it  further,  that  it- is  bu:  this  plain  Moral  receprion.  thus. 
As  Chrili  is  offered,  fo  he  is  received  (therefore  the  Aflcmbly 
fay  [as  he  isojf  redintheGofp  l~\  :  BuiChrift  is  offered  A-lo- 
r<i//7  in  the  Gofpel,  ar.d  noi  PkjficAlly  -^  therefore  he  n^uft  be 
fo  received,  i-  Rtycere  efir.o'h  ^  Ergo^recipere  ef}  velle.  To 
rejed  Chrift  is  the  condemning  fin  of  infidelity  :  but  that  lies 
in  an  unwillingntfs  to  have  him  to  be  their  Redeemer,    Saviour, 

and 


C^H) 


and  efpecially  Lord  :  therefore  receiving  Chrift  is  a  willingncfs, 
confent  or  acceptance  ofhim  for  Redeemer  and  Lord,  Joh.i.io. 
Ijiiorvnreceividhimr.ot  -,  What  is  that  but  they  refuled  him  ? 
and  not  that  they  wree  not  P^JJite  fhyjicalnceivers  of  Jptjlke^ 
Lake  1 9.  27.  Thtfe  miKeeremies  ch^i  ^'ould  net  ^  Pjould  rtign 
cverihem^  br'itighuher and deftroj,  c^rc.  1  hen  willirgnefs  of 
his  re  gn  is  part  of  that  fauh  which  juftifies  :  Even  willingnefs 
of  hiS  Keign,  ss  well  as  to  be  pardoned,  juftified  and  faved  from 
Hell  by  him ;  (  or  elfc  few  among  us  would  perifli ;  For  1 
never  met  with  the  man  that  was  unwilling  ofthcfe.) 

3.  And  then  it  will  cafily  appear,  pyhtther  jour  Do^nne  cr 
wine  he  the  more  fafe.  i.  Yours  hath  the  many  inconvenien- 
ces already  mentioned.  It  maketh  manhis  ownjuftifier,  or 
l\\Qcaufa  p<?A:/w<«of  hisownjufti'.cation,  and  by  his  own  A<ft 
to  help  God  to  juftifie  us  for  lo  all  inftruments  do  help  the  prin- 
cipaUaufe.  Andyet  by  a  felf-contradidion  it  maketh  fa.th  to 
beof  no  Moral  worch  ,  and  fo  no  vertue  or  grace.  Yea,  (I 
think)  ic  layeth  the  blame  of  mans  infidelity  on  God  ;  Many 
fach  wayes  it  feemeth  to  wrong  the  Father  and  the  Medi- 
ator. 2.  And  it  feemeth  alfo  to  wrorTg  mens  fouls  in  point 
off^fety,  boih  bydrawingthem  fo  towrorgGod,  and  alfo  by 
laj^^ing  grounds  to  encourage  them  in  prefumption  ;  For  when 
they  are  taught  that  the  receiving  of  Chrifts  righteoufnefs,  or 
of  Chiiilfor  juftification,  or  the  confident  cxpedation  of  par- 
don, orreftingonChrift  forit,  or  a  particular  pcrfwafion  of 
it,  &c.  Is  juftifyingfaiih,  and  when  they  find  thefe  in  ihem- 
i  felves  fas  undoubtedly  they  may  w  11  this  much,  or  elfe  they 
carirotprefumej.  Is  itnoteafieihen  to  think  they  are  fafe  when 
they  are  not?  Aslfaid,  I  never  yet  met  with  the  man  ihat 
WIS  not  willing  to  be  Jufitfi(d  nKd  fateJ  fnm  HelUy  Chriji  : 
«nd  I  dare  fay,  Rtall)  willing  .-  and  but  wiih  few  that  did  not 
fAVf^itfrom  Chrift,  and  trufthimfor  it.  Now  to  place  Ju- 
ftif}ing  faith  only  in  that  which  is  focorKmon,  and  to  tell  the 
men  that  yet  they  believe  not  truly  when  they  have  all  that  is 
madeeffential  to  fsith^as  Juftifying,  is  fi range.  For  knowing 
that  the  godly  themfelveshavefowly  finned,  and  that  no  man 
canperilh  that  hath  Juftifying  faith,  how  can  they  choofe  but 
prefume  when  chey  find  that  which  is   called  Juftifying  faith 

un- 


2-2'T) 


undoubtedly  in themfelvcs  ?  And  toteiithtmit  isnot  finccre 
or  true,  becaufe  they  receive  not  Chrift  alfoas  Kirgandt^o- 
phet,  and  yet  thatfuch  receiving  is  no  part  of  juftitymg  faith. 
Tbis  is  to  tell  them  that  the  tru(h  of  their  faith  lyeth  wiihouc 
icfelf  (a  flrange Truth  ^  in  a  fignal  ccrccmitart :  and  w-ho 
uiil  doubt  ofhis  fdithfor  wartof  a  concomitant  fign,  when  he 
certainly  feeleth  che  thmg  ic  felt  ?  \Vill  not  fuch  thir  k  chey  may 
i\n  f^lvafi^e  ?  When  as  if  they  were  rightly  taught,  ihac 
juftifymg  faving 'faith  (  as  fuch)  is  the  receivirg  of  Chriit 
tor  savioar  , and  Lord,  and  fo  a  giving  up  themfclvej  both  to 
be  faved  and  guided  by  him,  then  ihcy  would  find  that  faith  in 
Chrift  and  fincere obedience  to  Chnft  have  a  little  neerer  relati- 
on i  and  then  a  man  might  f&y  to  fuch  a  prefumer,  as  I  remem- 
ber TtTtH'lurt  excellently  doch,  De  [os-^stent.  Operum  pj£. 
{vtihtj  119  Ctt'eruw  non  Uviter  in  DcmiKum  pecCHt  qui  ijUHm 
4tmulo  tju4  Diitbolo  poentten:ii^  rernnciajftti  ^hccnon.ine  ilium 
Domino juhjec'f[it,r fir fus  iHKc[imrfgrt^H(uoer:git^  CT*  txu/tati- 
or,e  (j'ti  feipjhm  f^iic,  ut  dem^e  mulvu  recuferata  praJa  fffa  , 
aiverfui1)ominttm  ^cudeat.  Nonne  quo^  dtctre  (jno^ue  peri- 
cuhfumef},  fed  ai  td'ficationem  profercndHm  efl,  d  abolum  Do' 
mino  prdponit  t  Comparationim  erim  videtur  egijfe  qui  utrumq-^ 
cognovtnt^  C^  judtkatoproriur.ciaffe  turn  mdiortm  cujin  fe  'rur- 
fw  f^e  m^lfient,  (^c.  Sed  aiunt  qnidam,  fatis  Deum  hahn, 
Jicor^e  (^  animo  fujpfciatur^  Itceta^in  mintis  fiat  :  ita^u*  fe 
falvometu^  Fic'e  peccarc.  Hoc  efl  [alva  caflitate  Matnmoma 
violarcfalva  pietttte  farenti  vener.um  temper&re  ;  fic  irgo  ^  ipji 
falia  veniain  GeheK>jam  fietrnder.ttir ^dum  falvo  metn  peccant. 

Again,  your  Dodrine  feemcth  to  me  to  overthrow  the 
comfort  of  Believers  exceedingly.  For  how  can  they  have  any 
comfort  that  know  not  whether  they  are  juftified  and  fliall  be 
fived  ?  and  how  can  they  know  that,  who  itnow  not  whether 
they  have  faith?  and  how  can  they  know  that,  when  they 
know  not  what  juftif^ing  faith  is?  and  how  can  they  knowwhac 
it  is,  when  ic  is  by  Divines  involved  in  fuch  a  cloud  and  raazc 
of  difficulties  ?  feme  placing  it  in  this,  act  and  fome  in  that,  and 
fomcina  Pailive  inftrumentality,  which  few  underlUnd,  (If 
any  man  in  the  world  do.)  For  the  Habit  of  faith  ,  that 
cannot    be  felt  or  known  of  it  feif  immediately ,    but  by 

Gg  its 


US   a  As    C  for  fo   it   is    concluded  of  all  Habirs ,    Snart^, 
MttAp.T  I'difp.  44   v>.  i./)^^  5  3^0   *"<i  inftcad  ol*  the  a^i 
we  are  now  fet  to  enquire    after  the  paflion  ?  and  to  in  the 
work  of  cxaminacion  the  bufinefs  is  to  cr.quire,    he\\>  aid  when 
trsdidfijfuxl)  rect've  rifhteouftefsiOr  f-ijiification  ,    or  ChriJ} 
fortheje  /which  let  him  anfwer  for  himreU'thstcanj for  I  cannot. 
Hut  now,  on  the  other  fide,  what  inconvenience  is  therein 
the  Doftrine  of  faith  and  juftification  as  I  deliver  it  ?     As  ic  is 
plain,  and  certain  (faying  no  more  then  is  gencaliy  granted) 
fo  I  think  it  is  fafe.     Do  I  afcribeanyof  thrifts  honour  in 
the  work  to  man  >     No  man  yet  hach  dared  to  charge  me  with 
that,  to  my  knowledge :     and  no  confiderate  man  I  believe  w.U 
do  it.  I  conclude  that  neither  faith  nor  works  is  the  leali  part  of 
our  legal  righteoufnefs  ••    or  of  that  righceoufncfs  which  we 
muft  plead  againft  the  accufer  for  cur  jurtification :  which  is 
commonly  called  by  Divines,   the  matter  of  our  juftification. 
The  Law  which   we  have  broken  cannot  be  fatisfied    fnor 
God  for  the  breach  of  it)  intheleaft  mcaTure  by  our  faith  oc 
obedience,nor  do  they  concur  as  the  leaft  degree  of  that  fatisfa- 
dion  :  But  we  muft  turn  the  Law  over  wholly  to  our  Surcty.On- 
ly  wherea?  he  hath  made  a  new  Law  or  Covenant  containing  the 
conditions  on  our  part  of  the  faid  juftification  and  falvation, 
I  fay,  thefc  conditions  muft  needs  be  performed,  and  that  by  our 
fclves:    and  who  dare  deny  this  ?     and  I  fay  that  the  perfor- 
mance of  thefe  conditions  is  our  Evangelical  righteoufnefs   (in 
reference    to   that  Covenant,  )    as    Chrifts  fatisfadion  is 
cur  legal  Righteoufnefs  (in  reference  to  that  firft  Covenant^, 
or  as  perfeA  obedience  would  have  been  our  legal  righteouf- 
nefifc,  ifwe  had  fo  obeyed.     And  tor  them  that  fpeak  of  inhe- 
lent  Righteoufnefs  in  any  other  fenfc,  viz..  as  it  is  an  imperfeft 
conformity  to  the  Law  of  works,  rather  then  as  a  true  confer* 
roity  to  the  Law  or  Covenant  of  grace,    I  renounce  their  Do- 
arinc.both  as  contradidory  toic  fclf,  and  to  the  truth,  and 
as  that  which  would  make  the  fame  Law  to  curfe  and  blefs  the 
fame  man,  and  which  would  fct  up  the  defperate  Doctrine  of 
Juftification  by  the  works  of  the  Law  :  For  ifmen  are  righteous 
in  reference  to  that  Law,  then  they  may  be  fo  far  juftified  by  ir. 
Nor  do  I  sifcribe  to  works  any  part  of  the  office  or  honour  of 

faith 


C2-2-7) 

faith  fThough  that  were  not  (o  dangerous  as  to<fcrcgatc 
from  (  hriftj  Fori  acknowledge  faith  the  only  condition  of 
our  firft  Rcroiflionandjuftification  :  and  ihc  principal  part  of 
the  condition  of  our  julbfication  as  continued  and  confummate. 
And  if  faith  bean  inlitumental  cfufe,  I  do  not  give  that  honor 
from  it  to  works,  for  they  aierotlo:  Nay,  I  boldly  again 
aver,  ihat  !  give  no  rrore  toc^r,  tV^rf  ^o(^h'[i^  then  Divin.^s 
ordinarily  do,  that  is,ro  be  theucordary  part  of  the  condui- 
on  of  continued  and  confummate  jullification.  Only  I  gvc 
not  fo  much  as  others  to  faith,  becaul'e  I  dare  not  afcribe  (o 
much  to  tcan.  And  yet  men  make  fuch  a  noife  with  ihe  terri- 
ble name  olfufltficattcn  b)  y^-orh  ("the  Lords  own  phrafe  ),  a> 
if  I  gave  more  then  ihemfclves  to  man,  when  I  give  fo  much 
lefs. 

And  thus  Sir,  I  have  according  to  your  sdv'ce,  fpent  my  felf 
('as  you  fpeak  )  in  aiming  at  th.ir  ma  k  wh  ch  yt  u  were  pica- 
fed  tofetme.  And  now  1  ihall  proceed  tothe  rcftofyourcx- 
ccptions. 

My  next  arfwcr  to  you  was,  that  [If  vfo^kj  ander  every  no- 
tion dtre excluded  {as  jcm  fay  thej  art)  thenrtfer,tance  li  exclti~ 
ded  under  the  notion  of  a  condition  or  preparative  :  Bht  rtpentar.ce 
finder  that  notion  is  net  excluded  :  Thertfuenet  ^orks  under 
every  Kotion.To  this  you  reply,ihat  [_RtpeKtance  it  net  excluced  ai 
e^uaUfung,  but  as  rtcifient^  which  what  is  it  but  a  plain  yield- 
ing my  Minor,  and  fothccaufe:  For  this  is  as  much  as  I  fay. 
If  repentance  be  a  work  or  a  A  of  ours,  and  not  excluded  un- 
der the  notion  of  a  qualification,  for  as  you  elfcwhere  yield  j 
a  (Jl'fedrum  or.'iiaturn,  and  a  condition ,  then  works  are  not 
under  every  Qotion  excluded.  And  that  repentance  is  not  reci- 
pient, howeafily  dol  ycild  to  you?  But  do  you  indeed  think 
that  when  7^<f»/cxcludeth  the  worksofthei^ji^-that  he  ex- 
cludeth  them  only  as  Recipient  ?  and  not  as  qualifying?  If 
fo,  ('as  this  anfwer  fcems  to  import,  feeing  you  will  not  have  mc 
here  diftinguiih  between  works  of  Law,  and  of  Gofpcl,or  New 
Covenant)  then  you  give  abundance  more  to  works  of  the  Law 
then  1  do  or  dare  :  For  I  aver  that  T4»/excludeth  them  even 
as  qualifications,  yea  and  the  very  prefence  of  them:  and 
that  the  Jews  never  dreamt  of  their  works  being  Recipient. 

Gg  2  Ta 


k>^. 


iiz8) 


To  my  next  you  fay,  [^lyhether  PaAldifpate  wnjt  m  our  righ' 
teo4fnefs,  or  ufm  trh-it  terms  it  is  m  ide  ours  i  dothn  t  much  mat- 
ter \  But  I  think  ic  of  very  j;i  eat  moment  ;  they  being  Qqettions 
fo  very  much  different,both  in  their  renre,and  importance.  And 
whereas  you  ch  nk  Paul  fpeaks  chitflyof  the  minner,  I  think  he 
fpcaks  of  both, but  primarily  ofche(^«-<//)  mAteyi4  ;  and  of  the 
manner  or  means  thcreto^buc  fecondarily  in  reference  to  that. 
So  that  I  thinkthechief  Qu;ltion  which  Tviw/doch  debate,  was, 
iPbether  We a^e  Ju(hfi-d  b)  our  oWyi  works  or  merits^  cr  bf  Aao- 
r/Jjfr/j-y/'^i.thefatisfanionof  a  furety  ?  whichyet  becaufe  it  is  no 
way  made  ours  but  by  be!ieving,thererorc  he  fo  puts  the  Qiiefti- 
on^whecherby  worksof  the  L^w.or  by  faith  ?  and  fo  that  he 
makes  them  two  immediate  oppofies, not  granting  d^ny  tertinm^ 
I  eafily  ^ield.     (  B:it  of  that  btfjre.) 

To  the  nexc  you  fay,  that  Q/  CAnnoi  find  fnch  a  figure  for  faith 
Rtliitivil)  in  my  fen[e.\  AkJvo.  And  I  conceive  that  faith  \n 
my  fcnfe  may  be  taken  Relatively  full  as  well  as  in  ycurs. 
Doubtlefs  acceptance  of  an  offered  lledeemer  and  allhis  bene- 
fits doth  relate  as  properly  to  what  is  accepted  (  ^'^^.  by  the 
aflent  of  tlic  underftandtng  initially,  and  by  the  eledion  and 
confcnt  of  the  will  confummately)  as  a  Phjfical  Pajfive  recep- 
tion or  in^rumentAhty  can  do.  And  alfo  as  it  is  a  condition 
i  make  little  doubt,  but  it  rela'eth  to  the  thing  given  on  that 
condition:  and  that  the  very  name  of  a  condition  is  relative. 
So  that  in  my  fenfe  faith  relaieth  to  Ghnft  two  ways :  Where- 
of the  formerisbut  its  very  mture,  and  fo  its  aptitude  to  its 
office  :  The  later  is  that  proper  refpeft  in  which  it  immediately 
ordireftly  juftifieth.  Yet  do  I  not  mean  f  s  you  feem  to  do  , 
as  I  gather  by  your  phrafe  of  [w/^'w^  Love  andObeiience  for 
Chrijis  Right  eon  fyiejs~\  :  For  1  conceive  it  may  be  put  relatively, 
and  yet  not  ftridly  {  loco  correhti)  for  the  thing  related  to  : 
when  I  fay  my  hands  or  teeth  feed  me  ,  I  do  not  put  them  in- 
fteadofmy  Meat:  and  )ct  I  ufe  the  words  relatively,  mean- 
ing my  Meat  principally,  and  my  teeth  fecondarily  :  Nei- 
ther do  I  mean  that  it  relateth  to  ChriHs  righteottfnifi  only  or 
principally  ;  butfirft  to^>w/f/f.  And  I  doubt  not  but  Love 
to  Chrift  and  Obedience  to  him  as  Redeemer,  do  relate  to  him  : 
but  not  fo  fully,  clearly  and  diredly  exprefs  him  as  related  ro  , 
as  Faith  ;  Faith  being  alfo  fo  comprchenfive  a  grace  as  to  in- 
clude 


zip) 


cU'de  fome  others.     Itis  a  truefaying.thata  poor  woman  that 
ism.'rryrdto  a  Prince  is  rmde  honoKrahle  by  love,    and  con- 
tir.ued^obj  dmy  to  her  huih^Kci  :     But  it  is  more  obfcurc  and 
improper  iherj    to  fay,     (lie  is  made  honcyr.ihh  hj    'jAtar- 
M^£f,or  takidgfuchamin  to  her  husband, which  includes  love, 
and  implycth  dutvand  fdithfulnefs,    a^  neccfTirily  rubfvquenr. 
1  conceive  with  Judicious  DoUtr  n'refior.^  that  fa:this  truly 
and  properly  fuch  a  confcnr,  contra^^.or  rnarnage  with  C. hri'ft. 
Next  toycur  fimlitude :    you  fay  [th4t  1  bilit'hat  r.ct  only 
fti^q  this  ir  .'iefi  Sey^(nt^bpit  a'^>y  ctker  ABiont  cf/erfe,  vrill m 
W'ell  he^l  theX^ouKdedChriJlian.'^     To  which  I   anfwer.     Simi- 
htudes  run  noton  all  four,     fhus  far  I  believe  that  this  held?. 
I.  Chrirt  was  hftuponthc  Crofsauhe  brazen  Serpent  was  life 
lip.   2.  He  war  lift  up  for  a  cure  to  fin-ftung  fou'f  ,?s  \\  c  brazen 
Serpent  for  the  (lung  bodies.     5.  That  as  everv  one  that  look- 
ed on  the  '>erpcnt  aas  cured  fan  eafie  condition,  )  fo    every 
one  iha:  belitveth  Chnftto  be  the  appointed  lledecmcr,  and 
heartily  Accepteth  him  on  the  terms  he   is  offered  ,  and  fo 
truHeth  in  him,  flull   njr  per.fh,  but   have   evetlaftirg    l.fe. 
4.    That  as  the  cure  ofthtir  bodies  came  not  from  any  natural 
leafon  drawn  from  thee^e,  or  from  any  narural  excel.ncy  or 
efficacy  of  feinc;,  above  hearing  or  feeling,  but  meerly^rom 
the  free  will  and  pleafure  of  Goc',who  ordained  that  looking 
fhould  be  the  condition  of  theircure  .-    So  all  thofe  Afls(u''M- 
ally  comprized  or  implyed  in  tlic  word  believing)    which  jufti- 
fie,  do  it  not  from  any  natural  excellency  ,  efficacy  or  inflru- 
mentaiity  ,  bu:  meerly  from  the    ^ood  pleafure  of  the  LaA'- 
piver  :     And    therefore   the  natural    Receptivity   of  Faith 
(  that  is  its  very   formal   cfTencc  )     muft    not    be  given  ns 
the  proper  dir^-ct  caufe  of  its  Juftif^in^  :     Bur  that  is     its 
conditionality  from  the  free  appointment  of  God. 

But  on  the  ot!)c  r  fide,! .  1 1  was  r  nly  one  Act  ofone  fen^c  which 
was  theconditionof  their  (lire  :but  you  will  not  fry!  believe  that 
it  is  only  one  act  ofone  facul  y  which  jullt^eth  ;  however  (  wi!l 
not.  2. It  was  the  Aft  off  .-eif)^  which  cu»ed  rhem, without  toucii- 
ing,  laying  hold  On,  apprehending,  re'-ing  on,  (f-r.  But  you 
will  notfay  foof  fuftifyirg  faith.  5.  The  fight, whichwas  the 
condition  of  iheir  cure,  was  no  aduall  reception  of  the  bra- 
G  g  ;  leiT 


icnSerpent,  but  ihe  fptcies  oi  that  Serpent  by  the  eye;  and 
io  the  eye  did  no  otherwife  receive  the  Serpent,  then  it  received 
every  Objtd  itbihcld,  even  che  Serpent  that  ftung  them.  But 
if  you  fay,  that  cur  receiving  Q\\x\^\%h\ii  fer  fimpltctmaffn^ 
kerifijntmibj-Mi  ,  and  chat  i:  is  areceiv  ngof  his  fpicirj^  ard  fo 
that  we  receive  (  hrift  no  otherwife  then  we  receive  Satan,  or 
anyObjedof  Knowledge, I  will  net  be  of  that  opinion  4. Their 
cure  was  fimul  e^  femcL\  tuc  our  Juft.ficacicn  is  a  continued 
Ad;  asreaily  in  doing  all  our  lives,  asathrft.  5  Therefore 
though  one  ad  finillied  their  cure,  and  there  was  no  condition 
perfcribedas  requ  fice  for  the  confummation  or  continuance  : 
yet  when  our  j  ultificacion  is  begun,  and  we  truly  juftified, there 
is  furcher  condici  ns  preicrsbcd  for  Irs  continuance  and  con- 
fummaciop.  To  conclude,  I  am  To  far  from  Taying,  that  any 
other  Ad  will  as  well  heal  the  wounded  Chnllian,  befides  what 
God  ha:h  made  the  exprefs  condition  cf  his  cure,  that  1  flatly 
arer  00  other  will  doit,  t'ut  whether  he  haih  made  anyone 
fingle  ad^  or  Pafs!on}to  be  the  whvole  of  that  condition,  1  have 
elfeiA/here  out  of  Scripture  fhewed  you,  and  you  do  not  deny 
what  I  fay. 

My  twolift  Anf^ers  to  \our  expofitionof  P<;«// words,  you 
arc  pleafed  to  overpafs ;  the  laftof  which  (  the  ninth  )  being 
the  main  that  T  made  ufe  of  :  t«c.  that  P^ul  takcth  the  word 
Wo-fk^-  mo:eilridiy,  for  fuch  working  as  maketh  the  Reward  to 
be  not  of  Grace  buc  of  debt:  andm  this  fence  I  diftlaim  all 
work?,  not  only  (  a<!  you  do  )  from  being  receptive,or  inftrunjen- 
tal,or  effedive,  but  from  being  concomitant :  why  you  faid  no- 
thing to  this  my  chief  Anfwer,  I  do  not  know. 

You  next  tell  me  that  \  I  cannot  t^iks  '^^  ty^ffembUes  aefiniti' 
on  in  th.it  fence  as  rhiy  declurt  it^  or  tke  ~<crip(fire  vcords^  xth  chan 
Mtt.iVhorical  irr.ply  \  for  its  the  rtftirg  of  a  burdened  foul  upon 
Chrijl  only  [or  ft^hi'.oufnefs  -^  ayid  b]  this  C^^h^^  Ri^hteonjnefs 
H  made  over  to  us  ;  ar,d  its  a  recfiivifg  of  Chtiji  as  the  hand  em^ 
brAceth aK}'OfjeFfy  &c.  Anfwer.  That  the  word  Rtceiving 
and  Rc{l!).^  are  Metaphorical,  I  eafily  grant  you  ;  and  wonder 
the  more  that  ycu  1:111  infiii  on  them,  and  inltead  of  rr ducing 
them  to  more  proper  expreAicns,  do  here  add  Metaphor  to 
Mctrphor,  til!  all  your  definition  be  a  meer  Allegory,  when  you 

know 


0^50 


kno-v  how  much  Mctipho's  do  fediice.     But  for  the  AfTemblies 
D-iinition,    I  embrace  it  unfeignedly  in  chat  fence  as  the  words 
feem  to  me  moll  evidenrly  to  import,  without  ufirg  violerce 
with  them.  But  I  perceive  by  this.tbatyou  w.ll  rot  think  it  enough 
in  a  man  tofubfcribe  to  national  Confefsions  snd  Catcchifms 
in  the  obvious  fence,  or  that  which  he  jjJgcth  the  plain  proper 
fence,  except  he  alfo  agree  vvithyou  in  the  explication.     Some 
thnk  itno:  enough  that    we  fuSfcribe  to  the  Scripui'e,  bc- 
caufe  we  may  miiuiderlland  it,  and  therefore  we  muft  fubfcri  be 
to  national  Confc  film?,  as  more  explicate  :  C  which  I  like  well, 
fj  we  add  narhingto  Gods  word,  nor  thruft  ourowa  Commen- 
taries inco  the  Tex%  or  obtrude  our  own  Doctrines  upon  men 
as  Articles  of  their  faith,  or  at  leal>,  as  the  B  (hops  did  the  Ce- 
remonies, wh'ch  they  m:?de  indifferent  in  word,  bu:neccflary 
indeed:  )     Bntnow  I  p.Tceivcthe  mitter  comes  ail  to  onein 
the  IfTue  ^  w'len  you  cannot  make  a  definition  of  Fath  in  fuch 
Languag;  as  isanye;ifi.r   to  be  underliojd    then  the  Scrip- 
ture :  when  you    and  I  cannot  both  underhand  it  :  and  I  find 
that  many  are  ot  /»f//4?-w/>3f' Judgement  (  ^pol,  r.  y.cieedby 
Mr.  Vmes'xn  hi?  Sermon  agair.ft  H£ref.  pjp  50.  )  That  a  man 
miy  be  an  H£yetic'?^,  though  he  beVieve  the  JJcriptures,  the  three 
Creeds,  and  the  four  great  general  Councils.    But  to  r  the  fence 
of  the  AfTemblies  definition^     1    I  know  not  what  you  mean 
hy  x.htv}ov6s[  04  th:y  dtcLive if.  ]  If  any  private  declaration, 
I  am  not  to  take  notice  of  ir,  nor  do  I  know  what  it  meaneth, 
and  could  wifli  they  would  do,  or  might  have  done  as  Mr.  Visits 
defired  inhisSermon,  J/t-?.  28.  1645.  that  is,  [Tofecond  their 
conclufioMS  with    the  Reajons   and  Grounis  of  them  j  vchich  ^ill' 
do  much  JO  make  them  pajs  for  currant  :  feeing  (  f'tith  he  )  the 
Gorgons  head^hich  firuck.all  dumb  in  former  t  mcs^'Xhc  Church,, 
TheChurch,«  nn  likely  to  havi  the  fame  operation  rvrv  in  this 
feeing 4ndfearchiy.g  age  .,  for  though  men  bevrilliKgto  befuijfEi' 
to  ty^uthority^  jet  xi  they  are  men  thy  ^Vt  /  be  flwes  to  Re>ifon.'\ 
So  that  if  there  were  any  private  expufiion,  1  would  we  had  ir. 
But  if  you  mean  only  wfiat  is  declared  in  tlie  words  of  the  De- 
finition, lam  molt  confident,thoughI  never  wasinthe  Aflem- 
biy,  that  I  have  hit  on  their  fence  far  neerer  thtn  you  feemto 
have  done;  and  I  darenot  think  oihcrwife,  IcftI  be  hainoufiy 

cenforious- 


{^}^) 


ccnforious  of  To  reverend  an  Ailembly,  which  I  amrefoUednot 
to  be.      I.     Their  very  words  are  a  receiving  of  C^^ifl^  anJ 
not  immediately  anJ  primarily  his  Righteoufnefs,  buthimftlfj 
and  in  the  confcilion  they  fay  as  I  do,  thac  ic  is  an  accepting,  re- 
ceiving anJ  reOing  on  CfaritK     2    And  as  {'hrij}  zbe  anointed, 
wlii,.h  Name  lignifiech  the  Offices  wh'ch  he  is  anointed  to,  vi<.. 
K'.n^^  Priclt,    c^c.     7,.  It  ma'iech  it  to  confillin  no  one  aft, 
but   feveral ,  exprefT^-'d  in  tuvo  p'lra'es :    i.  Receiving  Chnit. 
2.   Ilcitirg  on  him  alone  fjr  fUvation.     4.  It  cxprelly  fiitl% 
that  it  \%,irtceni''gof  kim^  oi  he  u  ojfered  in  the  <iofpel,   and 
thatii,   not  ss  a  jjltifier  only,  but  a-,  a  Lord  and  Prophet,  and 
that  as  immediately  as  the  ocher,  and  conjunct  with  it:  for  he 
is  no  where  offered  as  a  juftifier  ilone  •,  if  he  be,  fhew  where  it 
i?.     5.    And  hence  it  is  pliin  that  they  mean  no  Reception  but 
naoral,  by  Willing,  Confentinq,  Accepting  ^  a?  they  exprcfly 
fay  in  the  confeilion  of  Fr-Ich  )  For  he  is  no  otherivife  offered  to 
us  in  the  Go  pel :  He  is  not  offered  co  our  Ph^fical  Reccprion. 
Itis'n:t  his  perfonin  fublhncethat  is  off  ered  to  thcContaftof 
our  Spirics,  muchlefsof  ourflefli^  buc  his  perTon  ascloathed 
With  his  Relarions,  of  Mediator,  Redeemer.  Lord,  Saviour, 
c-rc.     And  can  you  receive  a  King,  as  King,  (  who  is  pcrfonal- 
ly  diftaiK  orinvifible  jby  any  other  Reception  then  I  have  faid  ? 
If  we  do  receive  a  King  in:o  ErgUnd^  the  onl^  Ads  cf  the 
foul  are  hta^tf  confentln^,    and  wh.u  is  therein  and  thereto  im- 
pl.ed  :  though  bodily  Adions  may  follow  ••  (which  as  to  Chrift 
we  cannot  perform.  )     I  think  veril/  this  is  the  plain  found 
fence  of  the  Affembly,  and  (lull  believe  fo,  till  the  fame  Au- 
thority, chat  chui  derined,do  otherwife  interpret  their  own  defi- 
nition- 

And  for  your  phrafc  of  [  Refiing  a  burdentd  foul  on  Chrifi  for 
Righeoufnefi  1  1  doubt  not  as  it  intendcth  Atfiince,  but  it  is  as 
"Perkins^  Dr.  'D  jwnAM^  Roh.^BiroKinf^  &c»  fay,  a  fruit  of 
faith  ftridly  taKen,  rachcr  then  faith  it  felf .-  but  if  you  take 
faith  in  a  larger  fence  (as  the  Gofpel  not  feldom  doth,  and 
againil  which  (  am  no  adverfary  )  fo  Affiince  is  part  of  faith 
itfcif.  But  chat  it  IS  the  whole  of  that  faitl),  I  flidl  never  be- 
lieve without  Wronger  Arguments^  where  you  fay,  L  ht'the  re- 
ceiving  Chriji  as  the  h^nd   imhracttlo  arj  Ohjt^.  J    I  anfwer. 

I.  I 


Ci33) 


1.  I  am  glad  you  here  grant  Chrift  himftlf  to  be  the  ObjVd. 

2.  If  you  mean,  Q  as  vtriiy  oa  tht  ho^d,  cr-:.  ]  So  I  grant  it,  if  a 
moral  receiving  may  be  properly  faid  to  be  as  true  as  a  phyfica'. 
But  if  you  mean  'By  a  Phj[i:al  ContAtt  and  Reception  at  the  huni 
dork,     &c.    then  1  am  lar  from  believing  that  ever  Chri/I  or 
our  Adembiy  fo  meant.or  ever  had  fo  grofs  a  thought.     VVhei  e 
you  fay ,  /  take  it  not  the  inftr.c:  m  tke  Scripture  \\'ords  in>p  'y-^  I  an- 
fwcT.    When  I  fee  that  manifeited  I  fhill  believe  ic.  When  it  i-; 
faid  foh»  I.    He  came  to  htsown^  and hu  o^nreceived hint  not  : 
i.Is  it  meant  they  took  him  not  in  their  hands^or  received  no:  his 
Perfon  into  their  houfes?  the  later  is  true  ;    But  i.  Only  in  a 
lecond  place  •,  but  their  heares  werethe  firli  Receptacle  2.  Elfe 
thofe  were  no  Unbelievers  where  Chrilt  never  came  in  perfon  ; 
And  that  had  n  >  houfcs  ^  3.   And  tbdc  receiving  cannot  belong 
to  us  that  never  faw  him,   nor  to  any  fii^ce  his  AfccnHon,  2. Or 
{■s  it  the  Incelledive  Reception  of  i\'\s  fpeciej?  I  trow  not:    I 
have  faid  enough  of  that  before.     3.    O:  is  it  a  moral  Recepti- 
on of  him  as  thus  and  thus  related,  volendo^  eligendo^coyjfentieri' 
do,  ^iiigtndo  (  pardon  this  lift,  it  is  but  the  qualification  of  the 
rert  '  &  confer^uenter  fidtndo  ?  I  think  this  is  ic.     If  you  can  find 
a  fourth  way,  you  will  do  that  which  was  never  done '(  to 
my  knowledge  )  and  then  you   will  be  a  Novellift  as  well 
as  I. 

Foryour  next  expreflions,  I  anfwcr  to  them,  that  you  do 
truly  apprehend  that  I  am  loth  to  feem  to  recede  from  others, 
(and  as  loth  to  do  it,  but  m.igU  arnica  Veritas:  And  I  can- 
not believe  what  my  lift,  nor  like  thofe  that  can.  )  By  which 
you  mav  tiuly  know,  that  I  doit  not  out  of  affectation  of  fin- 
gularity  Cashcknowcth  that  knoweth  my  heartj,  nor  intend 
to  be  any  inftrument  of  divifion  in  the  Church.  And  if  my  af- 
fertions  are  deftructive  of  what  others  deliver, it  is  but  what  fome 
men,  and  not  what  all  deliver;  Not  againft  riie  AfTembly  , 
nor  many  learned  Divines  who  from  feveral  parts  of  the  Land 
have  fignified  to  me  their  A(Tent :  befides  all  thofe  great  names 
that  appear  for*  me  in  print. 

I'ut  you  tell  me  that  []  /  W4)'  not  bttild  on  fome  Homiht'cal 
popular  exprejjions  in  Any  mam  bo»kj.}  Anj^er^  Let  me  again 
name  to  you  but  the  men  I  laft  named,   and  try  whether  you 

H  h  will 


C2-5+) 


will  again  lb  entitle  their  writings.     The  firft  and  chief  is  Dr. 
rrejlorty  who  was  known C)  be  a  man  of  molt  choice  notions, 
and  fo  Judged  by  thofe  that  put  cut  his  book',3.nd  his  credit  fo 
great  in  ^w^/4«^,  that  he  cracks  his  own  that  fecks  to  crack  ir. 
And  his  Sei^ons  were  preached  before  as  judicious  an  Audito- 
ry (  at  leaft  )  as  your  Lectures,  and  yet  you  defend  your  own 
cxpretTions.     Yeaic  is  not  on. e  nor  twice,  nor  five  times  only, 
but  almoft  through  all  his  Books,  that  Dr.  rrefton  harpech  upon 
this  firing,  as  if  it  were  thechoifeft  notion  that  he  intended  to 
difclofc.     Yea  it  is  in  his  very  Definition  of  faith  as  juttitjing  ; 
arkl  Dr.  Prejion  was  no  homilctical  Dehner.     I  can  produce 
the  likeTcftimony  of  Dr.  Stoughton:  (  two  as  great  Divines 
in  my  eftcem  as  moftever  England  or  the  world  bred.  )  Another 
is  Mr.  fVuU-s  :  I>oubtlef8  ,  Sir,  no  homiletical  popular  man  in 
Writing  :    nor  could  you  have  quickly  bethought  you  ot  an 
^.riglifh  Book  that  lefs  deferves  thofe  attributes  :  His  words  are 
ihefe.     /  a^e>tt  not  to  pbce    the  faving    4^   of  faith  ,  either 
Vf'tih  Mr,  Cotton  (  at  bi^  Lcrafhip  cites  h'm)  in  the  laying  hold  o/> 
or  ajftnttng  to  that  Tromife-,   &c.    nor  jet  in  a  fariicnUr  ap- 
plication of  Chrifl  to  myfelfi't  ajjurance^or  a  believing  that  Chrifl 
it   mine,  &C.   But  J  cheoferi-tker  to  place  it  in  an  afl  of  the  fVtl/y 
then  in  d  hir  ofihsfe  forenamed a'^s  of  the  ZJ nderfl anding.  It  t6  an 
Accepting  ofChriji  i^ered^  rather-  then  an  A^enting  to  a  fropo/ition 
ajfrmed.To  as  many  at  received him,SiC.that  is, to  them  that  believe 
in  hU  name  John  r.      Qod  mak/s  an  Offer  of  Chrifl  to  all  (elfe 
fhoptldnot  Rtp'-obatfS  he  condemned  for  not  accepting  ofhim^as  nei- 
ther the  Devils  are^bicatife  he  W.w  nJ  offered  to  them.  ^PVhofoever 
vrill^  let  him  come  andtakj  of  thervuteroflifefree/jJ.^Qy.zz.l'/, 
fVheretup'Jn  the  believing  foftl  rfphes,    I  will  :  and  fo  ta^et  him, 
when  aGift  U  offered  tome,  thit  which  makjeth  It  to  be  mine  is 
my  Acceptation^  &c.     //  you  ca  I  tkis  taki'Jg  of  Chrtfl  (  or  con- 
fenting  that  Chrifl/hallbe  my  Sazi''ar)a  depend  r.g,a  Refling  or 
relying  on  Chnfl  for  falvatien  {if  you  fpeak^of  an  att  of  the  Wtll ) 
it  it  all  ont-^for  Talking  ofChrifi  to  be  my  Saviour^  and  committing 
my  f elf  to  C  hrifi  to  befave^l^  is  the  fame  :  Both  of  them  biing  but 
aconfenting  to  this  (^ovenant.^f  will  be  your  Qod^  and  youfhallbe 
my  T^eople^  &c.     And  if  yon  make  thif  the  fuvivg  AlI  of  faith, 
i'btn  Will Repent^ime  (/<»  far  at  < / i^ diJlinU  from  Faith )  ha  con- 

fe<jmnt 


(^30 


frfient  of  it  :  Confilence  alfo^  &c.  Thus  Mr.  PVa^lU  is  clear, 
that  the  Nature  of  Faith  is  the  fame  that  f  have  affirmed,  and 
in  no  popular  Sermon  but  in  his  Trnth  tryed.  pa^.  94,95.  And 
on  chefe  grounds  he  well  anfwers  BelUrwines  DUemma^  which 
elfe  will  be  but  fhiftingly  anfwered.  The  next  is  Mr.  Norton 
of  New  Engiani,  a  man  judged  one  of  their  beft  Difpu'anrs, 
orclfcthcy  would  not  have  chofe  him  to  encounter  i^paHom- 
pu  :  And  will  you  call  his  very  Definition  of  Faith  in  an  accu- 
rate Catechifra,  an  homilet  cal  popular  cxpreffion  ?  What  then 
in  the  whole  world  fhall  efcape  that  cenfurc  ?  His  Words  are  .• 
[_Queft.  li  hat  ii]uj}  if yiyii  Faith  ?  Anfw.  Itisajavingg^are 
of  the  Sfirit,  fio^in^  from  Elt^ion^  vhereb)  tht  foul  tecaveth 
ftfHi  C'lrif}^  as  its  Head  a^i  Savicti^^  accorJipjr  as  he  ii  revealed 
tnt  heGofpe/.']  {  fubfcribe  to  this  Definition  from  my  heart. 
The  next  c'^cd  ^^/Sk  Mr.  Ctiherwell^  not  in  any  popular  Scrman, 
bu:  in  a  folid  well  approved  Treatifc  of  Faith,  and  not  in  cota- 
raon  piHdges,  but  his  verydefin  cion  of  faith,  pag.  13.17.  and 
after  all  concludes. pa^.  1 9.  [_Thus  rve jee  that  the  verjf  natttre  of 
faith  ctnjijfeth  i»the  true  Acceptation  of  Chnfl  p^oclaime^  in  the 
G  fpel  \  The  next  I  cited  (  about  the  Definition  of  faith  )  was 
Mr.  Throgmortony  who  in  his  accurate  Treatife  of  Faith  (and 
not  in  any  popular  Sprmons)  and  that  many  times  over,  doth 
make  Faith  to  be  the  receiving  Chyiftfor  Prophet,  andonly  Rab- 
bi, fa  ^.'  hti  Difciplcs^  and  as  the  only  (Vaj  Oftd  Truth,  and  alfo 
04  Ktng,  Head^  Hushatd^  Prieft,  &c.  and  kjthswe  are  m-Mie 
Partakers  of  him  andallhti  benefits,  pag.  6.29.3 1-82.  &c.  And 
for  the  great  point  that  you  flick  at  of  Juftification  I  will  repeat 
the  words  of  fwo  of  thofe  Authors  which  I  have  named  : 
And  I.  Of  learned  C(7«r.  Bergiur ,  in  whom  you  (hall 
have  the  TeOimony  of  the  Angttflnne  Confedion  ,  Luther^ 
Aieut:i.er,  (^:.  included,  both  about  the  nature  and  cxrent  of 
Faith  ;  about  works  Legal  and  Evangelical  j  abouc  Juftifica- 
tionas  begun,  and  as  continued,  and  the  diftind  conditions,  and 
about  the  concurrence  of  Obedience,  ^r.  TraxU  Cathol, 
dijfert.y.  pig_gj-^,Scc.§.4.\.  Nee  tamcn  negat  cjufijuam  fidem 
■'i^e  Obedienttam  if  fano  fenfftj  ex  Rom.1.5.  &6.1  7.  &  i  O.  10, 
&16  76.  zThcff.i  8.  Aa.5.3  2.Heb.5.9.  iPet. 1.2, 14,^-2. 
I .     fides  eft  obedientia  tjttntenus  ejuf  aUus  proprius  refpondet  pra. 

Hh  2  cept9 


(235) 


vi-nus4;f  <«^  Rom.1.5.  nomir.c  cheuentia  iKfianttur^  tjMoi 'bo- 
m'nus  per  Evayigtlitim  nos  voc.U^  nos  vocanli  per  fidem  refpo/idt- 
MHi.  Et  fie  fides,  (  ut  loi^uitiir  Apo\.  Augu[\Xonf.  in refp.  ad 
^rg-  pjg. IZ) .)  e/}  Obedientia  cga  Evangeltum  :  ^r/^e  cum Obe- 
die^'ti*  mandatorum  legu  mmimt  confundi  debet.  Namut  rtEle 
Mcutzerus  {insxeg  Augwft  Coni'.rd.  4  cont.  Phot.  in.  15.  j 
Quantum  ab  Svangeli  I  Lex  dijl  at  ^  taniunt  ha:  obsdientia  abil- 
la  difierminJtur.^i.  2,EJ}  eiiam  fides  ebedentia,  qaatenus  per 
Sjnecdochen  L^^letonymicam  fign'ficat  toxum  cnUnm  Ji  fidelib^s 
prajiitftm  ;  radicem  una  cumfruflibus,  &C.  Nota  enim  eft  co'i- 
ftietudo [ertnonus  (ut  iecjuit  Apol.  Conf  -  uc^ul>.^f  iwpl.  /f^.pag. 
87.  )  cjHod  inttrdnm.  eodem  verba  caufa-n  (^r  e'TeHut  compleEH- 
mur  rs-Ttl  9vvcKd'.o)iYiy.  Ita  accipipoteft  fides,  Heb.  13.7.  and 
12.1,2.  Rom.  1.8,  I  Theff.  i.8.Ier.7.28.^  ^.Necdn- 
bimm  eft  cum  tficitur^  he  f/?  mandatum  ut  iredamus  ^  DUtgA- 
mtts\  1  John  3.2?.  ficut  in  precept 0  T)tligendi  &  habitus  churi- 
tatu  ^fruBus  atcjue  Opera,  ai  c^ua  habitus  ordmatur^  manduta 
funt  :  it  A  etiam  in  pracepto  creder,dt  &  habit  utn  fidei  ^  frw 
[ius  ejus  nobif  mandatos  effe.  IJnde  cumipfa  etiittn  ch^ritas  in- 
ter fruElus  fit  fidei  ^  fit  ut  tot  a  doHiina  Chrifiiina  aliquAndo  ver- 
bum  velprAdieatiofi^ei,  tota  t\jl:gio  ChriftiaKAf  tot^  ceconomia 
tievi  Teftawer.ti  fides  pracipue  appelietur-,Gu/.  I.  23.  i  Tim. 
4.6.  Gal.  5.  6.  and  3  23.  So  he  proceeds  and  alledgcs  Lu- 
rA^>' taking  faith  in  that  large  fenfe, including  charity  and  obe. 
dience  j  and  by  Works,  meaning  a[liones  faBoi  cum  opiniont 
merit't^  ^  cum  ex^eUeitione  jnfiifcAtionis  &  vita  aternt  tan- 
^uammerccdis  debits  Strm.  de  mif.  er  i'-  de  I^ert.  ChrifftAna. 
Tow.  2.fyit.f.^.  5.  &  Tom.  %.com.irt  Zacb. 2. 8. £?-«?<:/ Gsl.c.a. 
f.  3c o.  Et  ultrA  p.  977.  Cum  dic'ttttr  [^fine  operibus  legit  ] 

excludurtur^l .Opera  foiCla  m  veritate  obeditKtia  lega/sj,ac  meriti 
pnirtdepir  inr.tcenti(im.,cui deiur  Mtrcesci'.rn  rtm'^ffior.em  peccAti 
^impntAtionem  ftcundum gratiam.  Rom.  4.  3-  C"  /  ^iacau- 
fAtuseft  Apofiolus  toto  capite  i  &  2.  &  f-  Ta/em  Obtd  enti^md 
nemir.ehaberi^  fedomr.es  fub  peccuto  ejje,  &C.  2.  Bxcluduntur 
etiamoperAfa&acumopioriione  vers.  cbedieKtiiH  legalis  ae  meriti 
per  innccentiam ;  cjh%a  hac  ipfA  funt  ttifim  peccata  (^  mtndacia 
tnenfitiapoemm^VhWryy 

3 .  Ex- 


Ci37) 


3.  Excluduntfir  etiam  Optra  facta  cum  oftnione  merit  i  fine  obi' 
dientia  ^ep-  iriKCcentla  legali  aut  ex  (jHalicuKCjue  imperfecta  aut  p^r* 
ticiilari  ohedientia  cm  alufualiter  dttttr  i^Mercei  citra  imputa- 
tionew  fecur.dum  qratiam^bic.So  x]\7Zth\i\i  all  the  exdufionof 
Works, chat  he  acknowlcdgeth  .•  and  fhews  that  '^eiLrmir.e  is 
driven  to  this,  which  he  approveth.  <j.  44.  Exdiciis  hifce  tri- 
bhsmodiiy  prima  wodo  excludnntur  vera  opera  If g'n ,  ita  ut  non 
ad  ft  It  ^  licet  de^ereit  adejfe  prima  creationis  jnre  ;  pojlerioribHs 
atttem  duobm  modis  excluditntur  pntfanipta  (ptra  itu  ut  non  debe- 
ant  adeffe  fedcavcri  potihs  ;  St  ornnibm  hijce  modis  opponitur 
inter  fe  Lex  operum,  per  qnim  rel:n^uitHr  aloriatia  hifmini,  CT* 
Lix  Fidei^  per  quam  exc/nditfir  Gio>iitio^\\om.  3.27. 

Afterwards,  one  kn(e  in  which  he  faith  Ftdes  jola  y.tflijicat,  is 
this,/e/<i  ejl  files  tjuaten  us  oppmitur  legU  operum  obedtnti£icujus 
Veritas  in  nulla  eji  h'irr.tnim,  cpiy.ii  autem  in  nulla  dtbet  ejfe -^  O" 
Jignificat  contra  cbedientiam  legis  Fidtt^  fitt  pr^cctp-i^  non  de  cpe- 
rAndo  (^exptHando  vitam  utmercedem  debitam  citra  im^utaiio' 
nem  fecundttm  gratiam  ;  feJi  de  credendo  in  Chrifium  &  accipien- 
do  ^  Retinendovitam  grait4t^<^  (XptElar.do  vitam gloria,  ut  do- 
*tum  mere gratuitum  per  imputationem  ftcundam  gratiam  in  Chri- 
Jio^cjusmprifpfp.it  ^Deus  placamentum  in  <  anguine  ipfius, 

Ar\d2i(lQrwatd,Ex  di^tsfaci/eintellhitur  nihil  his  repugnare 
Aagujiinum^  (q-M  pncc-pae  nobis  opponitttr  )  cum  docet^  rxcludi 
tantum  ab  ^pojiolo  opera  faUafi-e  fide  O'fpiritu  Chijii  :  (  hoc 
eft^  fine  viva  fide  promiffionii^  q^  abnegatione  rherttt  prcprii,  fecut 
(^'Stllarm.  fupfadocebutf  cxcludiopira  ej^ibffs  ^dcjuod  reddi^ 
tur  tji  wercesnon  gratia)  opera  vero  fa^-t  cum  fide  ^  Spiritu 
Chrifii  ad  illam  moventt  non  excludi.  Namniijue  nos  ea  ex- 
cludimuf^ne fint,aut  debeant  effe  ;  fed  di[ltnguit  ettam  Lutherut 
opera  Itgii  ^'  opcraChif^iin  nobt-^per  (idem  operant  is  ^  viven~ 
ti6  per  omnia.  Addirtjue  htcnon  pajfe  magii  om.tti^ejuam  ipfi?» 
fidem,  nee  ejfe  minus  Kecejfaria  cjHumfidet-^  in  li,  de  vot.m:)n .  T,:. 
mt.fi2>i. 

But  the  chiefthingi  intend  is  in  the  next  words,  y^t  qnem- 
admodum  catera  aHiones  fign  ficata  per  Jidem  tfuafi  matertalitir 
C^  Sj/necdochice  per  fe  C^  direile  n^n  ordinantur  ad  amicitium  Dei 
&  falutem proprie  Efficiendam  (as  he  miftakingly  thinks  faith  is^ 
fedvtladfidem  cui^uaqtio  modo  profunt^  vcl  ad  amicitiam  'Vti 

Hh  3  & 


^fAluteffifaltem  non  araittendam  ;  tta,  nfejut  Jr^JliftnUfunt^  c^ 
jalvubunt  propri'e  d*  (iirtde.  Proderunt  tamen  Ad  utrum^tit 
ijt^tenus  funt,  i.  zel difp'>fiti-or.es ai  fid£m,ut'''P tireuuZ.  Efft^w^ 
^c.  -^.  Q^atenH! j)tr  ilia excludimttf  ^  cavimuj  peccata  ^  /»- 
emt  fdintm^tjua  omr.iaovera  canfa  .imittendt  ']nJlitU  dr  faltt- 
ru  futura  ejfent :  ejHAUm  CAufum  removtKtem  prohiheus  appdUre^ 
(^  AdcaUjOi  per  accidens  rtjerre  Jolent.  Omnn  enim  a r her  qua 
non^  &c.  ('Here  he  fpeaks  only  of  the  natural  conducibilicy  of 
works,  and  omittcch  the  moral  conditionality  j  and  fo  gives  a 
caufaluy  pcrrfcrtifw/ toth€m,wbichi5morethenI  doj  v\  54. 
^  in  hitcfru[iupnn  compArationeJub  notione  proprit  c&u[<t  j  nalia 
(\l  was  not  then  conlidcrcd  tliat  juflification  is  a  continued 
Act)p?rfmf«r«^^ncnamitiendum/f«^retinendum£r<?/»irfl^^f7, 
erdo  df  ^efpttli4s  operuw ai Jaltttem pmphcijfiir.e^^  ccmmodtjfime 
adSoi  ture,   fJumtxphc^ri  pottfi.  2  Fet.  i-iO.  2  feh.S. 

Accordingly  before  in  this  T^pe  he  makes  the  conditions  to 
be  I.  Acceprfition :  Tchatsfaith;  2.  and  retention  ;  fcbishe 
(lieweth  is  alfoby  Gofpflwork*-)  among  divers  allegations  of  his 
out  ofthe(tx^/><?/.  Vrfin.  Davencwt,  &c.  I  will  add  one  cue 
oiGfialthcr  ini  Cor.  how. 2^.  Vt  fiiitts  etfi  hares  natus  fit  ^ 
abdicatur  tanten,  &  ab  Jattreditate  excidit ,  fife  inobedientem  (^ 
contumacioremprxbeat  :  Uakos  ejuotjueregricdtlorum  leertaita' 
tem^  i}u£ex  adoftionis  gratia  nobis  dtbetur^minime  <juidem  no- 
firu  operibui  mtrevMtr  tAndem  vtronofirA  contumacia  amittimtts^ 
^  nojlro  ruAgno  memo  abdia'-mur^  ft  tAntd  gratia  ini^ni  fimus 
ajiimatores- 

And  he  reconcileth  Paul  and  fames  thus,  /.  56.  *jDew<jue  tto- 
tandum  efi  :  alirnn  ejft  loqHsndi,  &  docendi  modnm  contra  Judatf- 
mum  (fr  cont  empt  urn  gratia:  almm  coyrrafecttritAtem  ^  abufum 
gratia,  cum  difputatur  pracipuc  comrA  fudaifmum  ftvc  fftfiittAm 
opirum,  utl_V2M\\xs,in  tp.ad  Rom.  (^  aibifacit-^  tunc  doctmur 
folafidcjujiijlcatt^  hoceJi,,nikiltnKobi6placire  1)to  nifi  per  ab- 
ntgHtionem  meriii' ^  acceptAiionem  eonira  doni  BvangtUci.  At 
cum  difptitAtur  contra  fecuritatem,  &  docttuT  ^md  reipeRu  ami' 
citia  Dnina  r.obi-s  Agendum  fit  (p^out  Jacobus  in  £pif.  fua  fcdt^ 
f^hodie^  vel  maxime  necejfe  eji  ^we  may  truly  fay  fo)  ut  Dr, 
To^anm  wfua  Cent.  Pfendevangelicot  difputatione  et  alii  pte 
ecp^tsdenter  jimfridcm  monuermt)  tu^iC  ntgatnr   folam  fidem 

fufficere. 


f»fficere^  C^  pr<tcipinntur  omnia  qua  fjttocjuo  moh  py&funt :  five 
eiijpoMant  ad  fiiem^  five  iniii  cor.fhtnmttur  fidis^  (  ficm  quttvia 
rts  fine  &  tjfMih^ufttis  con[umf»atur  :  arbor  fruth}>:u^  fottntU 
amrrtt  motihtu  corporis^  non  cjtttd  acl  ejfent'am  fed  cjttod  ad  uf» m  ) 
fivepxfens  pm  dmiciiia  per  ilia  firmstHr  ne  cifjilta'^  vtl  euam 
augeutttr  ^nod  ad  efdim  aliquos  ,  &  hoc  modo  cjuafi  implea- 
tur. 

And  he  concludes  thus.  (,  58.  V»a  verba  :  foli  fiJt  jftfi' 
fic^mur  :  hoc  ejl  :  Nullo  noftro  meritc,  five  ipfnu  fi^ei/tve  al- 
ter iw  aflicMis  prater  fiiem.  Prober ur  evident er  f^  c^uhoHceme- 
ritHm  (jHule  d  mfiris  negMnr^  tunc  eti  *m  tllnd  pra:cer  lolam  fidem 
^imiffw^i  (nmru. 

Lud.  Crocius  faith,  (  Sjrtsg  7.4.  pag  mi.)  f  ides  etiam  foil 
j-*j}ificat  <jH.itenus  r.it<t  cbtSisniiam  quandzm  expe^iaitempro' 
Mtfjionemut  donum  ^ratuittim  ;  (juomoio  formalicer^uidem  con- 
fifiit  in  ap^lic<xtione  pro'nijfionis,  ejuam  tamen  (-r  praccday.t  dif- 
pofitiones  a/ujua  ad Iommc  ipfnm  fdei  a Eium ,  C^  (ttjuttritur  fruEius  : 
Mndeplures  virtutes  vel  aStts  tttm  artecedentes  tumcorffqiientes 
connotat;  Qr  opponitur  illi  obedientia  qutt  non  expeUat  promtjfionem 
tanejaam  donnm  omni)tograt'H'um,  (ed  ut  mercedem  prcpofi  am 
fub  conditione  cpsrii  alic»JMJ prate^  iccQ[ft2it\onem  &  gratitudi* 
rem  debicam  ^«<e  [ua  natura  in  omni  donatione  ejuamvu  grAtnita 
rtcfttirifolet.  Et  huyifmodi  obedi:n-ij  pecnliitriter  Opus  ab.  »y4~ 
pofiolo^  ^  Latinu propr  emeri'uw  dicitur.  Et  qii  ha:  conditi- 
one  obediunt  operant-cs  vocantur  ,  Rom.  4.4.  and  1 1 .6.  ty^tque 
fi  itAhitc  propofittJ  exponatur,  ea  c]nidem  operst  (jtz  cum  fidecon- 
Jifiere  netjHeAnt^  iJ  r/?,  ^m  fiunt  cum  fiiftci  i  cr  of  intone  meriti, 
prorfttt  tXclnd(4ntMr^  itaut  r,cnfolum>tegtntMyju(lifica-e^fed& 
tidejfe  tarn  injufiificato,  qukm  injufitficando. 

Joh.  Crocius^*  ;«/?»A  Mp-  ^  ^-  P*g-  ^7h  ^rf^^/fw/i/^^d  r/? 
fromijjia^  fide  accepturum  rtmiffioiem  peccatorum  :  mendico 
&  £gro  nonefl  fAHa  promijfij^  fi  iHe  ma*>um  extendat ,  d^tum 
iri  eleemofjnam  ;  fi  ifie  pharmacum  manu  capiat  conva/itm- 
rum^  C^c. 

Mr.  GaukcT ag4in(l  SMtmarfij  fiado^j,  &c.  p3g.?-6.40,4i, 
43»44t45,46  47,48,49,53,64.  dtthfnlly  give  as  much  coFaich, 
Repentance, Obedience  as  I  do.  Nor  know  I  any  reafon  tvhj, 
(  Johns )  'Saitifmfor  thefftbfiance  of  it^fbonldnot  it  an  example 

t9 


to  Ht  alfo  in  theft  timts^  being  the  Buptifnt  of  Rifentance  unto  Ke- 
Tttijfion  of  fms^  that «,  if  I  m'fi'iks  tt<-t^Baftifm  obfgning  remiff^- 
en  of  fins  np)n  condition  of  Repentance,  pag,  40.   !  and  pig.  4I. 
He  faich,  [^that  pirdon  (f  fin  and  falvat'.on  are  propounded  and 
preached  uponco»':iition  of  Faith, Repentance,  and  '^^'^nefs  of  Itfe^ 
vph-.ch  are  the  conditions  oj  the  Gofvel :  a  ^d  yet  may  thej  alfo  be 
fo  termed  m  conditions  of  peace  upon  agreement  unto,  and  perfor- 
mance whereof  peace  mzj  be  had^  rchichother^ife  cannot  be  ob- 
tained. ^;  And  he  evinceth  [his  by  an  Argument  drawn  from  the 
dcHnition  or  nature  of  a  condition,  thus,  f  T")??^?  xyit;V/t«  7O  f^-o- 
potinded^oi  that  being  performed^/ife  and  falvation  may  undoubte  ■'- 
Ij  be  attained,  and  without  which  it  cannot  be  had.,  may  Well  be 
termed  a  conation:  but  fttch  are  the  things   before  mentioned  -^ 
therefore  the)  may  juftly  be  termed  conditions]  vid.ult.  and  p.  4*^. 
Suppofe  a  King  be  content  at  the  fuit  either  of  the  parties  them- 
felves,  or  any  friend,  to  grant  hi^  graiciouspArdon  to  a  company  of 
notortoHS  Rebels  that  h-^dnfen  up  againfi  him^  &C.  upon  condition 
thit  the)  acknowledge  their  offence  ^attd  their  farrow  for  it  ^  ^'ith 
purpife  andpromifeof  living  loy:iUy  for  time  to  come  \  whether 
"^ould  yoH  deem  thi^  to  be  free  grace  or  no?  SiCC.     PV  ere  he  not  a 
mofi  ungracious  wrctch^that  hazing  his  pardon  onfuch  terms  grant* 
edandfignedhiff,  fiould  in  regard  of  thofe  conditions  deny  tt  to  be 
of  free'Cirace  ?  and  Whether  they  do  not  blafpheme  Qods  free  Grace^ 
that  dmy  itto  befree  Qrace,  if  it  be  propounded  on  terms  of  Be- 
lief^  Repentance  eind  Amendment  of  life.      Sir,  Whatfoever  jou 
fuy  to  us  ,  tak^e  heed  hoW  you  tell  Chnfi,  that  he  doth  not  freely 
fave  )ou^  if  he  will  not  fave  you  unlefs  you  believe^  O-c.  J    In  ma- 
ny more  places,  and  more  fully  Mr.  Gata^erChcws  that  Faith, 
Repenrance,  Obedience,are  jointly  conditions  of  Pardon,  ^r. 
Only  he  gives  Faith  a  peculiar  Receptivity  ^  which  1  never  dc- 
nycd  :     A  nd  he  yields  to  call  it  an  Inttrument,  which  fo  largely 
-taken,  I  willn  t  contend  againft.     Butftilll  fay  that  this  Re- 
ceptivity is  but  the  aptitude  of  Faith  in  a  fpecial  manner  to  this 
work  of  juftifying  :  and  the  reft  arc  apt  to  be  conditions  in  their 
place,  or  elfe  God  would  not  have  made  them  conditions. 
Even  in  regard  of  its  natural  aptitude  and  ufe  {^Hnmiliation, 
(  asMr.  r«wf/ faith,   Serm.  on  y^wf/4.8.  pag.  12.  )  though  it 
do  net  properly  cleanfe  the  hands ^jtt  it  pluckj  off  the  Q lover ^  and 

m  ^kes 


^..^^.  .,3emh^rtforx»AJhing  :    and  Godij  fatrotv  with  its ftvtn 
•T>4nlherJ,  2  Cor.  7. 1 1 .  are  cU»fmg  things. 

Dr.  Sto\ig\MO\RighteoHs  m^ns  p/eafor  hi  pp.  Strm.  ^.pag?2« 
Fii'th  comp'-ehsTtds  not  only  the  ^il  of  the  Vn  'er^anding^  hut  ih^ 
..i[l  ef  the  fVifl  too^  fo  oi  the  fViil  dothemhra:e  and  adhere^  and 
cleave  to  tbofe  Truths  ^hich  the  under Ji^yiding  conceives :  andr.ot 
only  embracing  metrlj  bj  A'^ent  to  the  Truth  of  it,  but  by  clcf%ng 
rviththeGoodof  it  :  (What  is  that  buc  loving  ?  )  tafiing  and 
rtlipjngit.  As  fa  thin  Chnfl  is  not  only  the  Ajjenting  of  4  mans 
mind  that  Chriji  is  th-  Savitur^  but  a  rtfultAncy  of  the  Will  on 
Ch^iflas  a  S ivi^nry  tmbracng  of  him^and  lozi  g,  tfleemingaKi 
honouring  him  as  a  S^wiour,  The  Scrip  ure  compyehendi  both 
thefe  together ^  andthe^e  i^  a  rule  for  it ,  which  the  Kohhmi  give 
for  the  opening  of  the  Scripture  ^xz-Verba  fenfus  etiant  deuotant  af- 
fenus,(is]o.i7.^.  ^  ha  u  eternal  life  to  know  thee.BcQ.lt  is  not  bare 
Knowledge  the  Scripture  means,  but  Knowledge  joined  with  affe- 
Elions,  ~\  You  fee  Dt.'^oughton  look  Love  to  be  full  as  near 
Kin  to  Faith  as  I  do.  Many  the  like  and  more  full  in  him  I  pafs. 
1  cited  in  my  Append.  Alfledius,  fuKtus^  Par<t'^s ,  Scharpius, 
Aretiut.^All,S>cc.m^king  Faith, &  Obedieyice,&  Gratitude  Condi- 
tions of  the  new  Covenant  (&  who  faith  not  the  famc^)  If  all  thefe 
be  hj'at'letica/ cind popular,!  much  miftake  themjwhich  yet  I  cite 
not  as  if  no  words  might  be  found  in  any  of  thefe  Authors  that 
feem  tofpeakothcrwife^  but  to  fhew  that  I  am  not  wholly 
fingularj(  Though  if  I  were, I  cannot  help  it  when  I  will.  ) 

On  the  next  Q.fP^hether  a  dying  man  ma)  loof^  on  his  Faith  and 
Obedience.c^  Dmy  us  the  condit  en  of  the  N.(^cv.  bj  him  perf  rm- 
ed  ?  You  would  perfwadc  me  that  I  cannot  think  that  I  fpeak 
to  the  poin:  in  this:buc  you  are  miftaken  in  me:  for  I  can  miftake 
more  then  that  comes  to  j  and  indeed  I  yet  think  I  fpokeas  di- 
TeS\y  to  the  queftion  in  your  terms  laid  down,  as  was  pofsible  ; 
for  I  changed  no:  one  of  your  terms,  but  mentioned  the  Affir- 
mative as  your  felfexprefled  it .-  If  you  did  mean  otherwife  then 
you  fpokc,  Iknewnot  ihar,  nor  can  yet  any  better  undcrftand 
you.  Only  I  can  feel  that  all  the  difference  between  you  and 
me  miift  be  decided  by  diftinguifhing  of  f  Conditions  :  ]  but 
you  never  yet  go  about  it  fo  as  I  can  underftand  you.  You  here 
isk/n^,  [^H'htther  Ithink^joff  deny  agadlj  Ufeto  be  a  comforta- 

li  hh 


(Hz-) 


bU  TeJiimoMj^  or  nictjfAyj  (jualtf  cation  »f  tt  man  fw  pardon  ?  ] 
Anfwer.  i  But  the  Qa^cftion  is  not  of  the  fynificancj  or  Tejiimo^ 
njy  nor  yet  of  all  kind  of  qualification  •,  that  is  an  ambiguous 
term,  and  was  not  in  the  Queftion,  but  of  the  conditionality. 
2.  Vou  yield  to  the  term  (Condition  your  felf  elfewbcre ,  and 
therefore  need  not  (hun  it.  g.  Qaalihcations  and  Conditions 
arc  either  ph'j  (ical  and  remote,  of  which  I  ratfe  no  queftion  : 
io  the  EHenci  of  the  foul  is  a  condision  ,  and  fo  hearing  the 
Gofpel  is  an.itural  Condition  of  him  that  will  underftand  ic  • 
and  underftanding  is  a  natural  Qiialification  of  h^m'that  will  be- 
lieve it;  For  ianoti  nulU  fiies.  But  it  is  another  fort  of  condi- 
tions you  know  that  we  are  in  fpeech  of,  which  I  haye  defined, 
and  Mr.  Qataker  before  cited  .-  viz.  ^orAi  legal  condition  {q 
called  infenjuforenfi  veJ legaliiwhea  the  Law  of  Chrift  hangs  our 
adua!  J  unification  and  falvation  on  the  doing  or  not  doing  fuch 
a  thing.  Yet  do  I  very  much  diftinguifli  between  the  Nature  and 
Ufes  of  the  feveral  Graces  or  Dutic,s^^(yi:ained  in  ti>9  conditions^ 
for  though  they  4re  all  conditions,  yet  they  were  not.^U  for  the 
fiine  reafbn^or  to  the  fame  ufe  ordained  to  bccqndiiionsi)but,rq- 
pentance  irfdne  fence  as  preparatory  to  faith  ;  and  Faith,  "i  ^Bf- 
caufeit  honoureth  Chrift,  and  debafeth  our  felves.  -•  Becaiife 
ic  being  in  the  full  an  Acceptation  of  the  thing  offered,  is  the 
moft  convenient  means  to  make  us  Pofle^ors  without  any  cqn- 
tcmpt  of  the  Gilt  :^  with  other  rcafons.thatmig|it  be  founi;!  ; 
So  1  might  affign  the  reafons  ( as  they  appear  to  us )  why  God 
hath  afiigned  Love  to  Chrift,  arid  fincerc  Obebience,  and. for- 
giving others,  their  feveral  parts  and  places  in  this  conditionally 
ty  •  (  but  I  have  done  it  in  my  Aphorifms  •,  )  but  then  all  thefe 
^re  drawn  from  the  diftinfl  nature  and  ufe  of  thefe  duties  EfTen- 
ciallyin  therafelves  confidered,  which  is  but  their  Aptitude  for 
the  place  or  conditionality  which  they  are  appointed  to,  and 
would  of  themfelves  have  done  nothing  without  fuch  appoint- 
ment. So  thatit  isonequeftion'to  ^sk.fVhy  doth  Faith  or  fVorkj 
of  Okeditnce  to  Chriji  fttjlipe  ?  f  To  which  I  anfwer  ^  Becaufe  it 
was  the  pleafureof  God  to  make  them  the  conditions  of  the 
Covenant,and  not  becaufe  of  their  own  nature  direSIy :  )  an4 
its  another  Queftion,  IVhj  did  God  choofe  Faith  to  the  Prtce- 
dewy  in  this  work}  To  which  I  anfwer.  i.  Properly  tl^erc 
is  DQ  caufe  of  God«  anions  without  bimfetf.    2.    But  fpeak- 


(H3) 


mgof  liim  after  the  manner  of  men,  ss  we  rr.uftdo  ,  itisbe- 
caufe  Faich  is  fitter  then  any  other  Grace  for  thisHonorand 
Office,  as  being  both  a  high  honouring  of  God,  by  believ.r<» 
him(chats  as  for  A{rent)and  in  its  own  Eflencial  nature,a  hearty 
thankful!  Acceptance  of  his  Son,  both  to  be  our  Lord  (which 
is  both  for  the  Honor  of  God  and  our  own  good  J  and  our  Savi-! 
our  todehver  andglorifieus  :  and  To  is  the  raoft  rational  way 
that  man  can  imagine  to  make  us  partakers  of  the  procured  hap- 
pinefj,  without  either  our  own  danger  f  if  a  heavier  condition 
had  been  laid  upon  us )  or  the  difhonour  of  the  Mediator .-  ei- 
ther by  diminiOiing  the  eftimationof  the  favour  (if  wc  had 
done  any  more  to  the  procuring  it  our  felves  ^  or  by  con- 
tempt of  the  Gift  ^  f'  if  we  had  not  been  required  and 
conditioned  wirhfo  much  as  thankfully  and  lovingly  to  accept 
ir.  )  Andthenif  the  Queftionbe,  fFhj  God  hath  trjjigneci  firi" 
cere  Obedience  and  Pcrjeverance  therein  to  th^t.fUce  of  feccn- 
dary  Ccnditiormlity  fr  the  continunrce  andcotifummaticnof  Jum 
/Itf.CMioa,  And  for  the  Attaining  cf  fdlvtitid'n  ?  T  aflfwcr.  Not' 
becaufe  they  have  any  fuch  Receptite  nature  asfaith,but  becaufe 
Faith  being  an  Acceptance  of  Chrift  as  Lord  alfOjand  delivering 
andrefign.ngup  the  foul  to  him  accordingly  in  Covenant,  this 
Duty  is  therefore  necefTanly  implyed,  as  the  thing  promifed  by' 
us  in  that  Covenant ,  and  fo  in  fome  fence  greater  then  the  co- 
venanting it  felf,  or  the  end  of  it:  and  Chrift  ncVc-r  intended 
to  turn  man  out  of  his  fervice,  and  difcharge  him  from  Obe- 
dience; but  to  lay  on  him  an  eafier  and  lighter  yoak  and  burden, 
to  learn  of  h'm,d"i".ar,d  therefore  well  may  he  make  this  the  con- 
dition of  their  finding  Eafe  ar  d  Reft  to  their  fouls,  A^at.  1 1.28 
2p.  Fcr/or  ihisend  hedyed,tbr.the  might  be  Lord,  Rom.  149. 
And  thjereforc  when  we  are  freely  pardoned.Sc  bought  from  hell, 
it  isequal  that  Chrift  (hould  rule  us,  who  bought  us,and  that  his 
Covenant  hang  till  the  continuance  of  our  Legal  title  to  pardon 
juftification,  and  glory,  and  fo  the  full  pofTefiion  cf  them 
upon  this  perfeverance  in  fincere  loving  grateful  fubjection 
tohimthat  bought  us.and  by  him  to  the  Father.Aod  thus^Sir,  I 
have  digre(Ted  and  ufed  many  words  on  this,  fwhich  to  ycul 
think  needlefs  j  not  ©nly  becaufe  I  perceive  that  yougcknow- 
Icdge  the  conditionality  of  obedience  in  fome  fenre,bttt  tell  me 

11  2  roc 


CH4-) 

not  in  what  fenfe.but  left  you  fliould  not  difcern  my  fenfe,  who 
dcfiretofpcakas  plain  as  lean,  that  you  may  truly  fee  where- 
in wed  ffcr;  And  that  I  alfo  may  fee  it  when  you  have  as 
dearly  opened  your  meaning  of  your  UTr[\^[_^alif}C(Jticyjj.'2 

And  for  your  Qyeftion    \_l^loeihtr  a  goMji  wan  can  th'nk.  ihe 
^iqhteou[ntfsofChij}  made  his  bj  Tvork^ing^   or   only  btliexing.'\ 
lanfwer.caufally  and  efficiently  by  neither,  1  think,  C  though 
you  think  otherwife  )  j     I  dare  not  fo  advance  faith  ,   and  fo 
advance  man.     1  remember  good,  old  ,  learned ,  folid  Gatd- 
ktrt  words  to  Sa'tma'/h(pAg.^i,)  It  isyourfelj  rat ker  then  any  of 
us  th^t  trip  at  thn  jione^  when  you  ^ould  have  faith  fo  much  pref^ 
fed  in  the  'Doctrine  offalvation^  in  regard  of  the  glotioufnefs  and 
emine^cj  «f  the  grace  it  [elf  \  rrhichto  ejfert^id  not  found-  (fie  in 
Animadvin  Lucium  fart.  i.  $•  9. f. 7.  j  Therighteoufnefs  of 
Chnft  is  made  ours  by  Gods  free  gift  j     but  faith  and  true  fub- 
Jeciion  are  conditions  of  our  participation  ;    and  what  intereft 
each  hath  in  the  conditionaiity,  and  on  what  grounds,  I  have 
(hewed.    1   fear  you  give  too  much  to  faith  and  man. 

You  ask  \_Is  it  repent, and  Chrifif  righteoufnefs  h]  this  u  madt 
joyrs}"]  Anf'^er-,  It  is  ofcimes,/ffpf«r  and  he  forgiven  ^  and  rc- 
tent  and  he  baptized  ;  and  repent  and  believe^  and  be  forgiven  : 
but  not  effclentljf  hj  repenting  nor  believing:  but  on  condition 
of  both ;  though  in  ordaining  them  conditions  God  might 
intend  one  but  as  preparative  or  fubfcrvicnt  to  the  other  ; 
and  not  on  equal  terms,  or  to  equal  ufe  immediately. 

And  when  you  fay,  [that  the  dying  Chrifiian  is  directed  to  the 
Rejiing  on  Chrifl^    and  eying  the  hniz.en  Serpent^  not  to  be  found 
in  any  thiyigbnt  a  righteoufnefs  hyfaith,~]  1  never  durft  entertain 
any  doubt  of  this ;   iti?  no  qucfticn  between  us :  only  in  what 
fenfc  it  is  called  a  Riglitfecufnefs  by  faith ,      I  have  fhewcd  ,• 
even  in  oppofition  to  Works  in  Pauls  fenfc,  which  make  the  re- 
ward to  be  of  debt  and  notof  Gracf,  /?<?>».  ^.  4.  where  you  fay 
[Jt  isan   /j^of  Dependence  not  ofObtdiencethat  interefis  us  in 
Chrifls  Righteoufnefs  ~\  I  anfwer,   It  is  no  one  Ad  but  many  ^ 
It  is    an  act  of  /lf[ent  firft     (  and   thence  the   whole  hath 
the  name  of  faith   ,     it  being  fo  hard  a    thing   to   believe 
fupernatural  things  ,     as  it  would  have    been  to  us  to  be- 
lieve Chrift  to  have  been  God  when  we  bad  fecn  him  in  the 

fliapc 


cho 


fliape  of  man,   had  wc  lived  in  thofe  timer,  whenthc  Dofirine 

offdithcame  not  with  thofc  advantages  as  now  ic  doth  J    And 

then  it  is  an  ad  of  willing,   confenting,   eleding,  affeding 

f  which  three  are  but  a  vtlte  Rejpectivum,  and  fo  in  the  at5\  all 

one):  and  this  in  order  of  nature  goes  before  any  ad  which 

you  can  in  any  reafonablc  propriery  call  Dependance:  and  1 

doubt  not  are  far  more  effential  to  juftif^ing  faith  :   ^et  I  ara 

heartily  willing  to  take  your  acts  of  dependance  (for  thofe  al- 

fo  are  more  then  one  j  in  the  next  place.     But  it  confound- 

ethand  abufeth  us  and  the  Church  in  ihis  controveifie,  that 

many  learned  Divines  will  needs  fliunthc  rtrict  Philofophical 

names  of  the  feveral  Acts  of  the  foul,  and  overlook  alio  the 

natural  order  of  the  fouls  motions,   and  they  wil!  ufc,  ar.d  ftil 

ufc  the  Metaphorical  expreflions,  is  apf  rehe^jfofi  (  improper^ 

depenJ/fice ,  relying,  ^*fl^' i-,  recomhency^  adhertncci  emhraeing^ 

with  more  the  like.     1  know  Scripture  ufcth  fome  of  thefc  ;  but 

then  it  is  not  in  ftrict  difputing,    as  fuh.Crociusith  EdUrm. 

we  may  ufe  apprihsttd  figuratively,    bccaufe  Scripture  faith, 

apprehcndite  difci-lmam,  and  lay  hold  on  eternal  life  :     But  this 

would  quickly  end  difputation  ,    or  elfe  make  ft  endlcfs.     Ye: 

in  the  places  cited,  who  knows  not  the  fime  word  hath  d  ffcrent 

Penfes  ?  in  the  former  being  ufed  for  to  accept  and  (loop  to  ;   in 

the  later  for  ancarneftprcirmgon,  and  endeavouring  after  as 

arunner  toca:ch  the  prize.     And  they  will  be  loth  to  fay  , 

thefc  are  all  and  each  of  them  the  juflifying  acts. 

And  where  you  add  that  iij«of  an  Wjt  of  obedimce.  lanfwer, 
I.  Iwou^dyouhad  firft  anfwcred  the  many  Scriptures  to  the 
contrary  produced  in  my  Aphor.  a.  Its  true  ofche  firR  inte-- 
rcltin  Chrift,  (further  then  faith  is  called  obedience)  but  not 
oFthc  further  continued  and  confummate  in'creft.  3.  Doth  not 
Chrift  (ay,  Taken*) jc'dk^ltamofme  to  be  mtck^andloWly  ^  that 
ihcy  may  have  eafe  and  reft  ?  Eafe  and  Refl  ?  From  what  ?  Why 
from  what  they  came  burdened  with  }  and  that  was  fure  gnlt 
and  cfirfe^&nd  what  ever  is  oppofed  '..o  pardon  and y4llifi:utiott, 
<^M4t,  \  I .  And  Slewed  art  thej  that  do  hU  commandments^thut 
thej  maj  have  right  to  the  tree  ojlife^and  may  enter  in  ^  &c. 
Rev.ZZ,  14.  And^^  is  the  /Juthor  of  eternal  falvAtion  to  dl 
them  that  obey  him^  Htb.  5.  9.     And    CMat.  25,     is  wholly 

I i  3  and 


and  convincingly  againft  you.  And  fo  is  the  fecond  l^falm  whol- 
ly ,which  makes  fubjection  to  Chrift  as  King,  the  great  pare 
of  the  Gofpel  condition.  \Kifs  thefon~^  conteine^h  more  then 
2?fc<7w^(f«cy,in  my  judgement  :  and  yet  no  more  then  that  true 
faith  which  is  the  condition  of  juftificacion. 

But  no  word  in  your  paper  brings  me  to  fuch  a  ftand  as  your 
next,  where  you  fay.  And  that  u  very  harfj/IiU  which  yott  ex' 
prefs^toexpiBtheRifhteoHpjefs  of  the  CovcKant  of  Cjrace  up- 
on  the  conditions  fnlfi'lcdby  jour  felf^  throttgh  G ods  workings .  ^ 
Anfw.  Truly  iris  quite  beyond  my  (hallow  capacity  to  reach 
what  you  here  mean  to  be  foharfh:  what  fhould I  imagine? 
That  there  are  conditions  upon  which  the  Tenor  of  the  Gofpel 
gives  Cbrift  Righteoufnefs,  you  acknowldge  :  And  that  he 
that  performeth  them  not,  the  Gofpel  giveth  him  none  of  ic :  I 
know  you  conftfs  thefc ;  And  that  we  muft  needs  perform  them 
our  felves,  through  Gods  workings  (  i.e.  both  enablement  and 
excitation,  and  cooperation:  )  1  know  you  doubt  of  none  of 
thefe  ;  for  you  have  wrote  "gainft  the  ^ntinomtans :  and  Mr. 
G'itiiker  hath  evinced  the  fortifli  ignorance  or  impudency  of 
Saitmarjh,  in  denying  Faith,  Repentance  and  Obedience  to 
be  the  conditions  on  which,  performed  by  us,  we  muft  enjoy 
the  things  promifed,  Pardon,  c^c.  or  elfenot.  Yea  in  this 
paper  you  yield  to  this  conditionalicy .  What  then  is  the  mat- 
ter >  Is  it  harfti  when  yet  you  never  once  (hew  the  fault  of  the 
Speech?  It  muft  be  either  the  falfhood,  or  the  unfitnefs  ; 
but  you  have  yet  accufcd  it  of  neither  ;  and  yet  fay  it  is^har(h. 

But  the  reafon  you  intimate,  becaufe  'Bellarm'me  hath  fome 
fuch  phrafe :  which  I  never  rcmembred  or  obferved  in  him  :  and 
iittle  do  I  care  whether  he  have  or  no  :  If  the  Papifis  be  nearer 
to  us  then  I  take  them  to  be,  it  is  caufe  of  joy  arid  not  forrew  : 
But  fure  I  am  that  Proteftant  Writers  generally  ufe  the  word 
Condition  j  and  fVetidelim  faith,  Tht  Pafifts  abufe  us  in  feigning 
as  to  fay  the  Gofpel  is  abfelme ;  and  faith,the  Gofptlin  each  fence 
14  conditional.  In  one  fence  Faith  is  'the  Condition  ;  'in .Another^ 
Faith  and  Ohe^ieme^  <^c. 

But  here  you  come  again  to  the  Labyrinth  and  tranfcendent 
Myrterie  qi  pajfivt  Faith :  nay  you  enlarge  the  Myftcric  yet 
more:    i.  You  fay  again,  [^  Faith  do  ihpsiti.  2*  And  jet  Love 

doth 


(H7) 


doth  agere.  5 .  Elfeyou  vpoaldyielJ that  Bellarmine  argues  cok- 
fona'it/j  enough^  that  Love  rvouid  jujfifie  tu  well  as  Faith.  4.  Tec 
jfou  ack>ioV;>ledge  Faith  an  A^ive  Qrace  :  bm  only  in  thi4  yi^i  its 
meerrecipient. 

tyinfrver*  I  confefs  my  reafon  utterly  at  a  lofs  in  this  ;  but 
yet  it  it  were  in  my  Bible  ( to  me  Intelligible  )  I  would  believe 
kas  I  do  theDodrioe  of  the  Trinity, and  ceafecrqiiirinf^.BucI 
cannot  To  do  by  any  Creature,  to  make  liira  the  Lord  of  my 
1-aith  and  Reafon.  i .  V/hecher  t'aiih  doth  Pan  I  have  enquired 
already.  2.  That  Love  doth  Agtre^  I  verily  believe  :  and 
yet  I  have  olter  beard  Love  called  a  FcJJlony.  then  Faith  :  And 
as  K-eckeram  faith,  the .  ^ifftBtons  n^e  more  Pfljjive  then  the  im- 
tndKCHt  Elicit  A^s  of  the  I-  telle^  and  (fill.  A  nd  I  hough  as  it 
IS  in  the  Rational  foul,  Love,  (  faith  Atfuin. )  is  no  Pafuoyi,  bu: 
a  tytUing  (  which  caufeih  me  to  judge  it  fo  near  Kin  to  Fa  th  ) 
yet  as  it  is  in  the  fcnluivc,  \i  is  a  Fcifior..  So  that  I  am  quite 
beyond  doubt  chat  phylkaiiy  love  is  more  properly  called  a 
JP^fTiontnen  Faith.  3.  TiKrcfore  for  ought  i  know,  it  is  no 
w^dcr  if  RtlUrwne  bear  the  Bell,and  Papifts  be  unconvinced, 
if  yqu  have- no  better  Arguments  then  this;  efpecially  if  no 
body  elfe  had  better.  4.  But  yet  the  Myfterie  is  far  more  un- 
fearchable  to  rae,that/<i/r^  Jhonldhe  A^live  in  all  other,  fave  only 
i0/^„^£?.VVh^tisthis  thingcalled  f4:>^,whichyou  make  fuch  a 
Proteus,  to  be  //^if  f  and  7'<«/0*t/f  as  to  fcveral  Obje^s?  Yea 
when  it  is  acknowledged  the  fame  Fiiith,  which  rcceiveth  Chrift 
and  Righteoufncfs,  and  the  feveral  promifts,  and  refteth  on 
Chrift  for  the  Pardon  of  each  fin,  for  hearing  each  Prayer,  for 
Aflurance,Pcacc,Comfort, Deliverance  from  temptations,  and 
dangers  and  fin,  and  is  thusufefull  through  all  our  lives,  for 
the  fetching  of  help  from  Chrift  in  every  Itreight ,  yet  that  this 
fame  Faith  fliould  be  y^^/jvc  in  all  the  Reft,  and  Tafsiveooly 
in  One  juftifying  Ad.  Oh,  For  the  face  of  an  Argument  to 
prove  this !  Sure  its  natural  Reception  of  one  Objed  and  ano- 
ther is  in  point  of  Pafsivenefs  alike  :  and  its  affigned  Conditio' 
nality  in  Scripture,  is  of  like  nature  as  to  each  branch  of  the 
good  on  that  condition  promifed.  5.  And  here  alfo  I  perceive 
by  your  fpeech  y  ou  make  it  confift  in  fome  fingle  ad.  Andy  et 
you  nevcc  tell  what  that  is;,  and  how  then  can  itbe  infeveral  fa* 

cultics, 


H8) 


tolties,  as  T>av€r:af)t^  Amejiitf,  f(yh.  Crociw,  AfeUncth.  with 
moft  do  affirm?  6.  But  yet  the  depth  of  the  myftcricto  me 
lies  in  undcrftanding  and  reconciling  your  word?,  [  O.ljintht^ 
Ad:  Its  meerlj  Reap  ent.  ^  Is  this  an  /I6i  too  ?  andyec  metrlj 
Recifient  f  (  which  you  make  a  meer  Paj.ive  reccpiicn.  )  A 
mterlj  Passive  Atl  is  fuch  a  contradidion  in  a^jeClo  to  my  un- 
derftanding,  that  I  cannot  welcome  the  notion  thither;  yeAif 
you  had  faid  lefsjthat  it  is  an  '-ict  in  ayj  Pa>t  or  Degrte  "^f.fnvt- 1 
never  knew  that  an  Ad  could  Pati-^  yet  am  I  more  confctous 
of  mine  own  infuffieiency,  then  to  contend  with  one  of  your 
knowledge  in  matter  of  Phiiofophy  ;  but  I  muft  needs  fay  that 
your  notions  arc  yet  fo  far  beyond  my  reach  that  pofiibly  [ 
might  take  the  words  as  true  upon  the  credit  of  one  whom  I  fo 
highly  value,yct  am  I  not  able  to  apprehend  the  fence. 

The  foj  :»  Heaven  which  you  mention  for  a  ^andrrng  Pieep^ 
I  think  is  meant  of  the  firft/T  fome  eminent  recovery  to  Chrift^ 
and  not  of  every  Philofophical  notion  :  fure.  Sir,  if  fafvation 
hang  on  this  Dodrincas  thus  by  you  explained,  I  am  out  of 
hope  that  either  I  or  ever  a  one  in  all  this  countrey  (hould 
ever  come  to  heaven  •  except  by  believing  as  that  part  of. the 
Church  believes  which  is  of  your  opinion:  When  I  am  yet 
apt  to  think  ,  that  fiding  with  any  party  in  fuch  opinions 
will  not  conduce  to  any  mans  falvation  :  For  I  am  of  i?fr^f«/ 
his  mind*  that  as  it  is  not  the  Jew,  the  Pagan,  or  the  Maho- 
metan ,  or  any  Infidel,  (privative,  )  thatfliall  be  faved  , 
but  the  Chriliian;  fo  it  is  not  the  Tapifi^  the  Lutheran  ^  the 
Calvintji^  the  ^rminian^  thtit  Jhxllbe  faved  (  <JHA  talis)  but 
the  C Atholick^.  Howeverl  am  inftrong  hopes  that  a  man  may 
be  faved,  though  he  cannot  undcrftand  how  an  Act  can  be  a 
pajfive in^rument  '^nor  6o\  think  that  my  fubfcribing  to  that 
notion  ,  would  make  any  great  rejoycing  in  Heaven. 

I  am  forry  you  had  not  leifure  to  anfwcr  the  Queftions , 
which  were  very  pertinent  to  the  bufinefs  of  ray  fatisfadion, 
though  not  to  your  bufinefs. 

That  my  explication  of  that  plain,  weighty,  neceffary  point, 
ho'^  imptrftEl  fra'^ei  or  duties  can  jet  be  the  conditions  of  the  New 
Covenant^  Qiould  feem  a  Paradox  ro;c;/,  ^  fay,  to  you,  makei 
me  yet  more  poffeft  with  admiration  ;    When  you  know  that 

fuch 


(HP) 


fuch  conditions  there  are  (fuppofelfwere  but  faith  alone:) 
and  you  know  your  fdf  that  this  faith  is  imperfed:.  But  t 
perceive  we  know  but  in  part,  and  therefore murt  differ  in 
part.  He  fliall  fee  whom  God  will  enlighten.  1  bad  far  ra- 
ther you  had  fallen  upon  that  point  then  on  the  term  of  fi^fii- 
ficationbj  wo^kj.  Ifycu  would  but  grant  me,  that  Jt^ft'fy 
i>:f^  faithy  Oi  fuch^  is  un  Accfpting  of  Chriji  for  Kivg  ,  and 
Frcphet  .is  well  as  forafuflifier^  aK^  cenfttfucrjly  that  it  is  Are^ 
ftgning  our  felvts  to  be  ruled  k)  loim  ^  M^^ellastobefAvedhj 
%iTrf^  I  fliall  then  be  content  for  peace  fake  to  lay  by  tbcphrafe 
of  fafiificationbj  rvorkj,  though  it  be  Gods  own  phrafe,  if 
the  Church  were  offended  with  it,  and  required  this  at  my 
hands  .-  (Sothey  will  be  fatisfied  with  my  filencing  it,  uirh- 
out  a  renouncing  it.  )  I  have  written  thus  largely,  that  I  might 
not  be  obfcure  »  and  to  lee  you  fee,  that  though  I  have  fcarce 
time  to  .cate  or  fleeep  ,  yet  I  have  time  and  paper  for 
this  work  ,  and  that  I  make  not  light  of  your  diffcnt. 
The  Love  and  Refpeft  which  you  mention  to  mc  1  do 
as  little  doubt  of,  as  I  do  whether  I  have  a  heart  in  my 
bread:  and  your  defires  of  my  reducing  I  know  do  proceed  from 
your  zeal  and  fincere  affedions.  That.which  I  take  worft  is, 
that  you  fliould  fo  defire  me  not  to  take  it  ill  to  be  called  an 
erring  fliepherd  ;  As  if  I  did  not  know  my  Pronenefs  to  err, 
and  were  not  confcious  of  the  weaknefs  of  my  underftanding:  or 
as  if  the  expreffions  of  fo  fincere  love  did  need  excufc  ;  or  as 
if  I  were  fo  tender  and  brittle  as  not  to  endure  fo  gentle  a 
touch  ;  as  if  my  confidence  of  your  love  were  Plumea,  non 
Plwnbeaiind  would  be  blown  away  with  fuch  a  friendly  breath! 
Certainly  Sir,yourfliarper  fmiting  would  be  precious  Balm,fo  it 
light  not  on  the  Truth,  but  me !  I  ara  not  fo  unftuous,nitrous, 
or  fulfureous,  as  to  be  kindled  with  fuch  a  gratefull  warmth. 
My  Incelled  were  too  much  adive,  and  my  afFcdions  too  paf- 
five,  if  by  the  reception  of  the  beams  of  fuch  favourable  ex- 
prcflions,  my  foul  as  by  a  Burning-Glafs  fliould  be  fct  on  fire. 
I  amoftafliamed  and  amazed  to  think  of  the  horrid  intolera- 
ble Pride  of  many  learned  Pious  Divines,who  though  they  have 
no  worfe  Titles  then  r>>»  i/o^<,  revermdi^cehbtrrmi:  yet  think 
chemfelves  abufed  and  unfufferably  vilified,  if  any  word  do  but 
McriiupHngtre  ^01  any  Argument  do/<«.vf»^«/  p^fjwfr^(v;itncfs 
Rivet  and  S^Anhemius  late  angry  cenfure  of  u^vtjrAlms  )  Can 

K  k  v.:^ 


Cz5o> 

we  be  fie  Preachers  and  Patterns  of  meekncfs  and  humility  to 
our  people,  who  are  fo  notorioufly  proud,  that  we  can  fcarcc 
be  fpokc  to  ?  My  knowledge  of  your  eminenc  humility  and 
gentelnefs  hath  made  me  alfo  the  freer  in  my  fpeeches  here  to 
you :  which  therefore  do  need  more  excufe  then  yoors :  And  I 
accordingly  intreat  you, if  any  thing  have  pafTed  that  is  unman- 
nerly ,  according  to  the  natural  eagernefs  and  vehemency 
of  my  temper,  that  you  will  be  pleafed  to  cicufe  what  may  be 
excufed,  and  the  reft  to  remit -and  cover  with  love,  afluring 
your  felf  it  proceeds  not  from  any  diminution  of  his  high  efteera 
of  yon,and  love  to  you,  who  acknowledgeth  himfeif  unfeigned- 
Jy  fo  very  much  below  you,  as  to  be  unworthy  to  be  called 

ToHr  ftlloVp-fervatit 

Richard  Baxxbr. 

June  28- 1650. 

Kedermiftflero 


Ffififcript, 


C^5i) 


Toftfcript. 

Ear  Sir ,  while  I  was  waiting  for  a 
meflenger  to  fend  this  by,  Mafter 
Brooksbf  acquaints   me,   that  you 
vviflit  him  to  tell  me  ,   that  1  muft 
exped  no  more  in  writing  from  you. 
My  rcqueft  is ,    that  whereas  you 
intimated  in  your  firft,    a  purpofe 
of,writing  fomewhatagainft  me  on  this  fubje(i^  here- 
after, you  would  bcpleafedtodo  itin  my  life  time, 
that  I  may  Have  the  benefit  of  it,  if  you  do  it  fatisfa- 
dorily  •,  and  if  not,    may  have  opportunity  to  acquaint 
you  with  the  reafons  ofmydiffenc.    Scrikunt  Afinium 
rolitoncm    dixiffe  aliquAndo  fe  parafje  ora,tiones   contra. 
Piancum,  quas  non  fJifi  peft  mortem  ejjet  editurus  5  c^ 
Flan  cum    refpofs'difje   ,       cum   mortuis   non     nift  lar- 
vas  luiiari :    ut  Lstd.  Fives  ex  Plimo ,   dr  Dr.  Hum- 
frcd.     ex    illo  ^efuit.   2.  p.   640. 

i^rfo  I  requeft  that  if  polTible  you  would  proceed  oh 
fuch  terms  as  youi  Divinity  may  not  wholly  depend 
upon  meer  niceties  of  Philofophy :  For  I  cannot  think 
fuch  points  to  be  neer  the  foundation  :  Or  at  leaft  that 
you  will  clearly  and  fully  confirm  your  Philofophical 
grounds:  For  as  I  find  that  your  Dodrineofa  Paflive 
lnftrumentalityoftheA(^  of  faith  (and  that  in  a  Mo- 

Kk  2  ral 


ral  reception  of  righteoufnefs  which  is  but  a  relation, 
yet  calling  it  Phyfical)  is  the  very  bottom  of  the  great 
cliftancc  between  us  in  the  point  of  juftification  :    S.o  I 
am  of  opinion  that  I  may  more  freely  diffentfrom  a 
brother  in  fuch  tricis  philofophicis  then  in  an  Article 
of  i^aith  :  Efpecially  having  the  greateft  Philofophers 
on  my  fide  •,    and  alfo  feeing  how  little  accord  there 
is  among  themfelves^that  they  are  almoft  fo  many  men, 
fo  many  minds :  and  when  I  find  them  profefling  as 
Combacchitu  in  frdf. ad Phyf  ihdit  they  write  againft  their 
own  fenfc  to  pleafe  others,  (d* q»od  miiximam  ofinismm 
in  lib.  content  arum  far  tern  nonjam  frebaret)  dr  Anjlote- 
l&m  nonefje  nor  mam  veritates  ^znd  wifhing  Ht  tandem  alt' 
quando  exurgat  aliquisqui  per/e^ioranobts  princifia  mon^ 
y?r^/;and  to  conclude  as  he,  falfttatem  opinionum(jrfe»' 
untiArum&  fcientiarum  imperfe^ienem  jam  pridem  vi- 
deo ,    (ed  in  veritate   docenda  deficio.      Et  Nttlli  aut 
vaucis  certe  minus   me   [atisfa5iurum   ac  mihi  ipfi  fat 
fci&.       And  how  many  new  Methods  and  Dodrines 
of  Philorophy  this  one  age  hath  produced  ^     And  I  am 
fo  far  fceptical  my  felf  herein,  as  to  think  with  Scali- 
ger  {jb'td.  cit. )  Nos  injlar  vulpis  d  Ciconia  delitf^  vitreum 
vas  lambere^  pultcmhaudattingere.     But  I  believe  not 
that  in  any  Mafter- point  in  Divinity  ,    God  hath  left 
his  Church  at  fuch  an  utter  lofs  ,     nor  hanged  the 
faith  and  falvation  of  every  honeft  ordinary  Christian  , 
upon  meer  uncertain  Philofophical  fpeculations.    •!  do 
not  think  that  Paul  knew  what  a  Pafsive  inflmment 
was  5  much  lefs  [_  an  a^  that  rvas  fhyfically  pafsive  in  its 
injirumentality  i/t  a  meral  caufation.']     You  muft  give 
me  leave  to  remain  confident  that  Taul  built  not  his  Do- 
ctrine of  juftification  on  fuch  a  philofophical  founda- 
tion 2 


(^55) 

rion,  till  you  have  brought  one  Scripture  to  prove  that 
faith  is  an  inftrument,  and  fuch  an  inftrument  5  which 
can  neither  be  done.  Efpecially  when  the  fame  Paul 
profefleth  that  he  came  not  to  declare  the  Teftimony  of 
God,  Kx'i'u'a-.fi')(^)]vi'oy-a »  s-cifitif  f  and  that  he  determined 
not  to  know  any  thing  among  them  fave  lefus  Chrift 
and  him  crucified  •,  and  that  his  fpcech  and  preaching 
was  T\othTet^oiiA\Spa>Tr'mi(tT9pU{io)ji{)  that  fo  their  faith 
might  not  ftand  it  tro-^iadr^pa^Tc^i:  &that  he  fpoke  the  my- 
fteries  of  thcGofpel  ^k  ^^(/rfiTo7f  *»9f<vT«ni<  ac^Ui  ?,o>c/<,aAA' 

c;'  Jlif'UKruf  <si\'i\.'y.cL7o<  <tyiti\  '3'."Jvu«t7*)Co7f  'jiivynniKd  cwyKflycTiii 

I  Cof.  2.  I  am  pad  doubt  therefore  that  to  thruft  fuch 
Philofophical  didates  into  our  Creed  or  ConfelTion  , 
and  make  them  the  very  touchftoneof  Orthodoxr.efs 
in  others,  is  a  dangerous  prefumptuous  adding  to  the 
Do(5lrineofthe  Gofpel,  and  a  making  of  a  n^w  Do- 
i5lrineofjuftification  and  falvation,  to  the  great  wrong 
of  the  Prophet  and  Lawgiver  of  the  Church. 

I  was  even  now  reading  learned  Zanchius  proof  that 
believers  before  Chrift  did  by  their  t;iith  receiyeChrifts 
flefli,or  humane  nature  (as  promifed  and  future)  as  well 
as  the. Divine 5  and  his  heavy  cenfure  of  the  con- 
trary Doctrine,  as  vile  and  unfufferable^  which  occafio- 
nethme  to  add  this  Quere,  Whether  that  believing, 
was  a  phyfical  reception,  when  the  object  had  no  real 
being  or  did  not  exift  i  Or  whether  meer  morral 
reception  (  by  Accepting ,  Choofing,  Confenting  ) 
as  a  people  receiving  the  Kings  Hcircs  for  their 
future  Governours  before  they  are  born  •  or  as  we 
receive  a  man  for  our  King,  whodwels  far  out  of  our 
fight  5  Or  as  Princes  wives  do  ufe  to  take  them 
both  for  ihcir  Husbands  and  Soveraign  Lords,  even 

Kk    I  in^ 


C  2.54-0 

in  tbeir  own  Native  Countrey  ,   before  they  com-e 
to  fight  of  the  man  •,     the  match  being  both  driven 
on  and  made,  and  the  marriage  or  contiact  performed 
and  imperfectly  folemnized  at  thatdiftancc  by  an  Em- 
badador  or  Delegate  1    juft  Co  do  we  receive  Chrift, 
(whofe  humane  nature  is  far  off,  and  his  Divine  out  of 
our  fight)  to  be  our  Saviour,  Soveraign  (by  redempti- 
on) and  Husband-,  even  here  in  our  native  Country  5 
the  match  being  moved  to  us  by  his  Embafiadors , 
and  imperfedly  folemnized  upon  our  cordial  confent, 
and  giving  up  our  felves  to  him  by  our  Covenant  : 
(but it  fliall  be  perfectly  folemnized  at  the  great  •Mar- 
riage of  the  Lamb.  >  This  is  my  faith  of  the  nature  of 
true  juftifying  faith  5  and  the  manner  of  its  receiving 
Chrift. 


THE 


<  III  •  II 


C^T) 


^^'  HB  ^ader  mujl  underjlandthat 
after  thisj  had  aperjonal  coni- 
fer encemth  tUsDear and  ^e- 
verend^rother^vpherein  be  (lilt ov^ned and 
'inffledon  the  pafsivenefs   of  fuflifying 
faith;vi^.  That  it  is  but  a  Cjrammatical 
aBion, '(  or  nominal^and a phy/tcal^  or  hy.^ 
perpjh/icalpa/sion^  vphich  alfo  hegiveth  ii. 
again  in  the  Treatife  of  Imputation  oj 
rtghteoufnefs. 


FINIS. 


DISPVTATION, 

Proving  the  Necefsity  of  a  two- fold 
Righteoufnefs  to  fujltfication  and 
Salvation. 
And  defending  this  and  many  other  Truths 
about  luftifying  Faith,  its  Obje<5l  and  Of- 
fice, againft  the  confident^but  dark  Affaults 
of  Mr.  lohn  Warner, 

By  ^ichard^axter. 


Him  bath  Cad  axalteJ  with  his  right  hand  ,  a  Prince  and 
a  Saviour^  to  give  Me^entance  unt»  Kncl^  and  for- 
give nefs  of  fins, 

Rom. 4.  22, 23, 24, 15. 

jfnd  therefore  it  was  iwfuted  to  him  for  Righteoufnefs : 
Norp  it  was  not  written,  for  his  fake  alone  that  it  was 
Imputed  to  him  %  hut  for  us  aljo,  to  whom  it  fi^ail  he 
Imputed.,  if  we  Believe  on  him  that  raifdup  Jefus  our 
Lord  from  the  dead  5  who  was  delivered  for  our  offen- 
ces, and  was  raifed  again  for  our  ^uflt fiction. 


LONDON, 

Printed  by  R,iv,  for  Nevil  Simmons^  Book  feller  in  Ke- 

Jirmi»J}ery2nd  are  to  be  fold  by  him  there  ,  and  by  Nutka- 

nielEkinSiii  the  Gun  in  Tauh  Chnrch-ysrd,  1658. 


(  2-59  ) 


Queftion.  JJ^hetherTBefdesthe^gh^ 
teoufnefs  ofChrijl  Imputed,  there  be  a 
Terfonal  Evangelical  ^ghteoufnefs 
necejjary  to  fuflijication  and  Salva^ 
tion  ?   Affirm, 


Hough  it  hath  pleafed  a  late  Opponent  (  Mr. 

Warntr  )  to  make  the  Defence  of  this  Propo- 

fiti^n  necelTary  to  me ;  yet  I  fliall  fuppolc  that 

I  may  be  allowed  to  be  brief,  both  becaufe  of 

what  I  have  formerly  faid  of  it,  and  becaufe 

the  Qucftion  is  fo  eafily  decided  ,  and  Chri- 

ftians  are  fo  commonly  agreed  on  if. 

For  the  right  underftandingof  what  wc  here  maintain,  its 

necefTary  that  I  explain  the  Terms,  and  remove  confufion  by 

feme  nccefTary  diftindions,  and  lay  down  my  fenfe  in  fome  Pro- 

pofirions  that  make  to  the  openirg.of  this. 

To  trouble  you  with  the  Etymologies  of  the  words  iafeveral 
Languages  that  fignifie  Righteoufntfi  or  fufiification  would  be  a 
needlefs  lofs  of  time,  it  being  done  to  our  hands  by  fo  many, and 
we  being  fo  far  agreed  on  if,  that  here  lycth  no  part  of  our  prc- 
fentcontfoverfie. 

L I  2  The 


Ct6o') 


The  Form  of  Righteoufncfsjfignified  by  the  name  is  ReUtivt, 
as,/?>x'r  or  crooked  iS.  (For  it  is  not  the  Hibit  ofjufticcby  which 
wegive  everv  man  his  own.  that  is  the  Subjed  of  our  Qucfti- 
on;  buc  Rigliteoufnefs  in  a  judicial  or  Leg^l  fenl'e  )  i.  Righ- 
teouftttfs  is  either  of  the  caufe^  or  of  the  ^trfon.  Not  that  thcfc 
arc  fubjects  actually  ftpirattd  but  Jiftin^^  the  one  being  fubor- 
dinate  to  the  other.  T  he  caufe  is  the  nearert  fubJL'(fi,  and  fo  far 
as  it  is  jnfi  zndJHjii^  *lfle,  fo  far  the  pfrfon  is  ju/}  and  juftifi^hU, 
Yet  the  perfonraayor^^^-t*?!/* be  juft  and  juftified,  whenoneot 
many  caufcs  are  unjuft^^'able. 

3.  Riihtioufnefs  is  denominated  either  from  a  Reluion  to  the 
'^rtcept  of  the  Law  ,  or  tothe  SanRion.  Tu  be  rtghttom  in  Re- 
lation to  the  Precept^  is  to  be  eonfa>  m  to  that  Treccpt ;  An  AQi- 
(»i  or  Di/pofi  io-t  conformtothc  Precept,  i{  called  a  Righteous 
A<5tion  or  Difpofition :  and  from  'hence  the  pnfon  being  fo  far 
confermriscalled  a  Righttont  pnfon  :  And  fo  this  Righteoufnefs^ 
as  to  the  pofitive  precept,  is  his  ohtyiag  »V  j  ar\d  as  to  the  pj^okibi* 
tton^  it  is  his  //;Kocr«7,  contrary  to  that  ^«///,  which  we  call  Rta^ 
tHfCttt'pa. 

RighteoulnefiKii  Relation  tothe  Sanfiion  ,  is  either  a  Rela- 
tion to  the  i^omminntion  and  penal  A.A  of  the  Law,or  to  the/?ro-. 
mi([$rj  or  Premi  int  A  '^.  As  to  the  former.  Right tou[ntfs  it  no- 
thiflgv  \i\Ml\\zNit-dftenefs  of  the  puni/bitent  ,  contrary  to  the 
Re^H*  pcen^i^  as  it  refpeds  the  executisn  i  and  fo  A  not  heing  Ij^ 
able  to  condemnation^  as  it  refpe^Ss  the  fentei^t.  This  is  fome- 
time  founded  In  the  perfons  Inancencj  laft  mentioned  :  fomc- 
timeon  a /r*fpW#'»  or  acquittance  :  fomerime  on  iatiffaHion 
made  by  himfelf :  An  J  fomeiime  on  fttUf^isn  bj  Mnether^conf 
junft  with  free  pardon Cwhich  is  our  cafe.) 

Rightewfnefs  as  a  Relati  jn  to  the  f^romife^  or  Premiant  pari 
of  the  Sandion,  is  nothing  but  out  Right  to  the  Rtwsrd^  Gift, 
ovBtftefit^  gi p'eadible  and  jufitfjable  ituforo.  Which  foinetimc 
is  fouided  in  rnerit  of  our  own ;  fo  netime  in«  free  Gift :  fomc- 
time  in  the  merit  9f  another, con^nnR  mth  free  Gift^  which  is  our 
cafe,  (other  cafes  concern  us  not  j  This  laft  mentioned,  is  Righ- 
seoufntfs  as  a  Relation  to  the  [nhfiance  of  the  T^romife  or  Gift : 
But  jwben  ihtProm^fe^  or  Gtft^  or  TefiAmenh  or  Premiant  Law 
iscondimnAlf  as  in  our  cafe  it  i$,  then  there  is  another  fort  of 

Rigbtc- 


Righteoufncfs  neccflTary ,  which  is  Related  to  the  MoiHspro" 
mfjl^nti^  and  that  is,  Th«  ptrformance  of  tht  condition:  which  if 
itbe  not  p'"operly called Ri^htcournefs£r/&iV<ii7/,  yet  ctvU/y  in 
a  Judiciary  tenfe  it  is,  when  it  comes  to  be  the  caufe  to  be  tryed 
and  Judged  whether  the  perfon  have  performed  the  condition, 
then  his  caufe  is  juft  or  unjuft,  and  he  juft  or  unjuft  in  that 
refpeft, 

J.  R'ghteoufftefs  is  either  Vniverfa/,  as  to  all  caofcs  that  the 
perfon  can  be  concerned  in :  or  it  is  only  p.irticft/ar,  as  to  fome 
caufes  only,  and  fo  biit/fcundum  efnitl  to  the  perfon. 

4.  A  pArticnlar  Rightteufnefs  may  either  be  fuch  as  the  totat 
welfare  of  a  man  depends  on ;  or  it  may  be  of  lefs  and  inconli- 
derablc  moment. 

5.  When  a  rattfe  fuiforMnAte  to  the  main  caufe  is  Righteous^ 
ibis  may  be  called  a  fubordtnate  Rigloreoujneft.    But  i(  it  be. 
ptrt  of  the  m^in  cattfCy  it  is  a  partial  rtghteaufntfs  co-ordinate. 

I  will  not  trouble  you  with  fo  exad  a  difqmfition  o^  the  Na- 
ture of  Righteoufnefs  and  Juftification  asl  jadge  Ht  inic  felfj  , 
both  becaufe  I  have  a  little  heretofore  attempted  it,and  becaufc 
Iffnd  it  blamed  as  puzling  curiofity  or  needl  fs  diftingu  (hing  :  . 
Though  I  am  not  of  chat  mind,  yet  I  have  no  miiide  tu  be  crour 
blefome. 

As  f  )r  the  leim'^ujiificatioM,  i.  It  either  may  fignihe  the  A  El  of 
the  LcC^  or  Promife  :  or  the  fintenceofthe  -fudge  :  or  the  Exe* 
tuttonofthatfentence;  For  tooneof  thcfe  three  fences  the  word, 
mayftill  be  reduced,  as  we  (h^ll  have  to  do  with  it  ■,  thatiSj   to 
ceHfittMtive^oT  fentential^OT  Executive  Ju'iification  ;  though  the  - 
jentence  is  moft  properly  fo  called.  To  thefe,    Ju/hficittiott  by 
F/ea,  ffittfeft .dec.  ire  fu^ftrvient. 

2.  fujiilkation  iseither  oppofed  toa /^//^  Accufacion,  or  to  » 
a  tr$te. 

3.,  Inourcafc,  Juftification  is  either  aaording  to  the  LiW  of. 
Pforkjy  or  to  the  LttW  of  Grace. 

I  think  we  (hall  at  this  time  have  no  great-  need  toufe  any 
more diftinflions then thcfc  few,    and  therefore  I  will  add  no  . 
more  about  this  Term. 

A<^to  the  term- 1  Evangt/ical']  Righreoufrjef*  may  be  fo  cal^ 
Icdin  i^  fourfold  fenfe,     1.  Either  bccaufe  it  is  that  rigUteouf- 


'  fiefs  which  the  Cove)t>wt  or  Law  of  Grace  requireth  as  its  Condi- 
tion •,  Or  z.  Becaufe  its  a  Rightcoufnefs  rtveaUdby  the  Golftl; 
Or  3.  Becaufeitis  f7ii'f»by  ihcGo^f/ ;  4.  Oc  becaufe  icis-a 
ftrfe^  fuifi'iing  if  lie  Precep::  ofthc  gos}el. 

i;y  £4  /),"';<7»;4/ J  RightcoufnefSjWe  mean  here,  not  that  which 
is  ours  5y  mecr  Imputation,  but  that  which  is  founded  in  fome- 
what  Inhcenc  in  USjOr  performed  by  us. 

[  Ntctjfi'j  ]  is  I .  of  a  mcer  i^-lntecedent,  2.  Or  of  a  MtMix 
We  raeanthelart.  Means  SiVe  c'.ihcr  caufes^  or  contiiiieni: 

I  Hiall  now  by  the  help  of  thefe  few  diftinctions  give  you  the 
plain  truth  in  fome  Propofitions,  both  Negatively  and  Affirma- 
tivcly,as  followeth.  ,f-\w^ 

Propofition  i.  Itis  confejfed  by  ail  that  k^orv  thmftlves^orman 
and  the  Law^  that  none  of  us  have  a  Perfonal  univerfal  Rightc- 
oufnefs. For  then  there  were  no  fin,  nor  place  for  conftjfutn^  •rpav 
don,  or  Chriji- 

Prop.  2.  An^  therefore  we  mnfi  all  confefs^  that  in  regard  of  the 
Prcceptive;><<r<o//)^rLaw  of  works  ^eareall\in]\i9i^  and  cannot 
be  JHftified  by  the  deeds  of  the  Law,  orb)  our  workf. 

Prop.  3 .  y^ndin  regard  o/?k  Commination  of  that  Law,  W» 
are  all  under  guilt  and  the  Curfe,  and  art  the  children  ofrvrath^  and 
therefore  cannot  be  JHJiified  by  that  Law,  or  by  our  works,  ^oth 
thefe  are  proveti  by  Paul  at  large ,  [0  that  none  have  a  perfonal  Le^ 
gal  Rightcoufnefs. 

Prop.  4.  No  man  can  plead  any  proper  fatisfaction  ofhii  oVifn 
for  the  pardon  of  fin^andefcaping  the  curfe  of  the  La^  :  But  only 
Chrifts  Satisfaction,  rifc^r  fulfilled  the  Larv  ,  and  became  a  curfe 
for  us. 

Prop.  S-  '^^  wan  can  plead  any  rattit  of  hii  o^n  for  procuring 
the  Reward  (urJefs  at  anions,  that  have  the  promt fe  of  a  Reward^ 
are  under  Clorifl  imprcptrly  called  merits  )  But  our  righteoufneft 
ofthi^fort  IS  only  the  merit  and  purchafe  of  (fhrif^andtheiit%  gifc 
oftkeCjefpelinhirtJ. 

Prop.  6.  i^Vehaveno  one  vioxkthat  is  perfcdiy  juftifiablc  ^jr 
the  perfeB  precepts  of  the  Law  of^orkf:  And  therefore  ^e  have  no 
legal  perfonal  Righteoufnefs  at  all  that  can  properly  befo  called  ; 
but  art  4// corrupt  and  become  abominable,  r/!;fr^  being  none  that 

doth 


(z^O 


d6th  good,  no  not  one ;  Imperfect  legal  rlghrcoufnefj,  it  aniw' 
proper  (peech ;  It  is  properly  no  legAlrighteott fiefs  at  all^  but  a  left 
decree  of  Hnrlghteoufnefs  (Tkc.moreto  hlame  they  that  caH  f an-- 
fiificatioHfo) 

Prop.  7  Notftancav  Caythnheii  a  Co-ordinate  Con-caufe 
Vvhh  Chrifl  in  h'u  Jnjiificatton  ;  or  that  he  hath  the  leafi  degree  of 
a  fatisfadory  or  Meritorious  Righteoufnefs,  which  may  heAr  any 
pA'-t  ir.  co-ordination  ^ith  Chnfis  right eoufnefsy  for  hit  J!tjlific4' 
tion  or  /til vat  ion. 

Prop. 8.  TV£  have  not  any  perfonal  Evangelical  Riglitcoufnefs 
of  perfeft  obedience  to  the  Precepts  of  Chriji  himfelf:  whether  it 
he  the  Laypnf  Nature  xs  in  h'J  hand,  or  the  Gofftl  pofitives. 

Prop.9.  EventheG:){^i\  perfon-il  Right ej)u/nefs  of oulw&rd 
works,  though  bnt  in  fincerity,  andnot  perfeSiion^  it  not  ntce^4*-y 
(  no  not  Oi  an  antecedent  )  to  our  Juflification  at  the  firf}. 

Prop.  10,  Externa!  works  c/Holinefs  are  not  of  ahfolme ntceffi- 
tj •  to  Scilvation  :  fyr  it  is  poffible  that  death  ntay  fuMtnly  after 
Convtrfion^  nrevent  opportHnitj :  and  then,  the  inward  faith  and 
repentance  rvi/i  fujfice  :  Though  I  thinly  no  man  can  givtPU  one 
infianceofjucha  wan  de  fado  :  not  the  thief  on  the  croft  :  for  he 
conftfjed  pr.jedf  reproved  the  other ^Su:, 

Prop. II.  Where  fincerc  Obedience /i  N^^cefTiry  ro  Salvation, 
it  ii  not  all  the  fame.  Acts  of  ohedience  thdt  a^e  of  Ntcejfity  to  all 
men,  or  at  all  times  :  for  th;  Matrerwd;  vary^  and  yet  the  lincC" 
my  of  obedif we  cofitinae.  Btttfome  fpecial  Mlt  are  0/"  Mecefli- 
ty  to  the  fircerity. 

Prop  12.  //"Righteoufnefs/^f  denominited  from  the  "PKcepZ, 
Chrifit  Obedience  rvas  a  ptrfcii  legal  llighteoufflefe,  as  having  ^^ 
perfeEl  conformity  to  the  La^  :  But  mt  Jo  an  Evangelical  Righ- 
teoufnefs :  for  he  gave  m  many  Laws  for  the  application  of  his 
Merits^that  he  wa6  nei'her  obliged  to  fulfiil,  nor  capable  of  it 
If  ({Jghteoufnefs  be  denominated  from  the  Promifc  or  premianc 
part  of  the  Law,  {^hri(}s  r/ghtemfneff  Wis  in  fome  forsthe  righ" 
teoufnefs  of  the  Law  of  wjrt^<^  (  por  he  merited  all  the  reward  of 
that  Law  \ )  "But  if  rvaJ  priacipiUy  the  righteoufnefs  «f  the  fpe- 
cial Covenant  of  Redemption  (  bitrveen  the  Father  and  him  ;  ) 
hut  not  of  the  Covenant  ofGrSiCS  made  with  man  (he  did  not  rs' 
ftfit  or  obey  for  pardon  and  falvation  tthimfelf  as aTSeliever;} 

if 


(16^) 

"^rFRightcoufncrs  h  dtnomlnated  from  the  Comminatory  orpiMdl 
f4rtoffhe  LAT9y  then  Chrifts  fufferings  ^trt  neither  a  ftridly 
legal,  or  4M  Evangelical  righteoufnefs.  For  the  Law  required 
fi[;tf  fupplicium  ipfius  delinquentis,  and  k*te^  no  Surety  or  Suhjii^ 
tHte.  But  thus  ^hrtjis  fufferings  were  a  Pro-Legal-righteouf- 
nefs,  as  being  Kot  the  fulfilling  of  the  Threatening,  but  a  full 
Satisfadion  to  the  L&w-g'ivcr,(  which  wa4eci(4ivale»t)  and  fo  a 
valtmble  cor,ftderation^  ^hj  the  L^w  fl.ouU  not  be  fulfilled  (bj 
^ur  damnatijn  )  but  difpenfed  with  (  by  our  pardon  )  So  that  the 
Cowmination^asthecaufeof  Chrifis  fufferings '^  and  hefufered 
materially  the  fame  fort  of^eath  ^hich  the  Law  threatened.  But 
mofi  ftriSilj  hii  ft*  firings  were  a  Righteous  fulfilling  his  pare  of 
the  Covenant  of  Redemption  with  the  Father  :  "Sut  in  no  pro- 
priety ^ere  they  the  ful filing  of  the  Comminalion  of  the  Law  of 
Grace,  againfi  the  De^ifers  or  negleUtrs  of  Grace.  1  mean  that 
proper  to  the  Goffei. 

Prop.  13.  Chrtfis  righteoufnefs  u^eU  cdlied  tf«r  Evangelical 
Righteoufnefs,  both  as  it  u  Revealed  by  the  Gofpel,  and  confer- 
red by  it^and  cppofed  to  the  legal  way  of  f  unification  by  perftCl  per- 
fonal  Righteoufnefs.  So  that  by  calling  our  oV^n  perfonat  righte- 
aufneft ,  Evangelical,  we  deny  not  that  Title  to  C^rifls,  but  give 
it  that  in  a  higher  refpe^,  and  much  more. 

Prop.  14.  No  perfonal  righteoufneft  of  ours  ^  our  faith  or  rt- 
pentance,  is  any  proper  caafc  of  our  firft  f  unification ,  or  of  our  en- 
teringintoajuftffyedfiate  :  Though  as  they  remove  Impediments^ 
or  are  Conditions,  they  may  improperly  be  calledcMftJi  So  much 
for  the  Negative  Propofitions. 

Affirm.  Prop.  i.  That  a  Godly  man  hath  a  particular  righ- 
teoufnefs, or  may  be  Juft  in  a  particular  caufe  ,  there  is  no  man 
can  deny  :  nnlefs  he  will  make  him  ^orfe  then  the  Devil :  for  if 
the  Devil  may  befalfly  accufed  or  belyed,  he  is  jufi  in  that  particu- 
lar caufe. 

Prop.  2.  AllChriflians  that  J  know  do  confefs  an  Inherent 
Righteoufnefs  in  the  Saints  ,  and  the  ntctffity  of  this  righteoufnefs 
to  Salvation.  So  th^t  thia  can  be  no  part  of  our  Coniroverjie. 

Prop.  3.  Confeeiuently  aHmufi  confefs  that  Chrifis  righteouf- 
nefs imputed,  M  not  our  only  righteoufnefs.  TeSfthat  the  righteouf- 

nefs 


(2<?T) 


veft  <ff  Ttirdon  and  Jftflifieatioftfr^m  fin,  is  no  further  neeejfary 
then  men  Mre  finners  ;  and  therefore  the  left  need  any  man  hath 
ef  it^  the  better  he  pleafeth  ChriJ},  that  is^  he  had  rather  "^e 
yvould  beware  of  fin  as  far  m  may  be,  then  fin  and  fly  to  him  for 
Pardon, 

Prop.  4.  And  we  are  agreed  I  thinl^tbat  the  perfonal  Righte- 
0\l(nc(ioftheSainte  ufowMchthe  end  of  Chrifis  Redemption  and 
Pardoning  Grace-,  that  the  perfeftion  of  this  u  thatbki^cd  ftatc 
to  '^hichhe  will  bring  them  y  fo  th^t  when  he  hath  done  bn  jvorkt 
Sandification  /Jjafl  beferft^l-y  but  Juftification  by  Pardon  of 
further  fins,  JhaU  be  no  more :  Heaven  cannot  bearfo  i^nperfeSi  a 
fiate. 

Prop.  5.  fVe  are  agreed  there  fore  that  our  Righteoufnefs  .of 
Sandification,  or  the  Do^rine  thereof  14(0  far  from  bein^  any  de- 
rogation or  difhononr  to  Chrift^  that  it  is  the  high  honour  rrhicb  he 
intended  in  his  Hirork^  of  Redemption  ,  that  the  Glory  of  God  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Redeemer  may  everlafiingly  finne  forth  in  the 
Saints,  and  they  waj  be  fit  tJ  love, <tnd[erve^un^  praifehim.  Tit. 
2.14. 

Prop.  6  h  if  pafi  all  douh  that  tbii  InUtreni  Rigliteoulhefs 
confifieth  in  a  true  fulfilling  of  the  Conditions  of  the  '.-ofpcl- 
Promife,4Mi^4fincere  Obedience  to  the  Preceprs  ofCh^ijl.yind 
fo hatha  double  refpcH'.oricto  the  Promife  ;  and  fo  it  if  conditio 
prael^ita:  the  other  to  the  "^itzt^i-^  «««i^ /c?  «  fe-  Officium  p  arfti- 
tum.  /i/^  Conditions  here  are  Duties:  but  all\)\ii\t%  .^rc  not  the 
Condition. 

Prop,  7.  I thinkjwe a^e agreed, xhAt'\\y.^\^Qn\Q>uh\i  Chrift  3« 
Judge  at  the  great  day  ,  ha:h  the  vtry  fame  (..  i^ndicor-s  «s 
Salvation  i5>/if^,  it  /'««_^<«»  adjudging  us  to  Salvation.  <^ind 
therefore  that  this  perfonal  Evangelical  Righreoufntfs  ts  of  nccef- 
fiti  to  our  Jufttficaiion  at  that  J udgemenc. 

.  Prop  8.  ''Ind  I  think  Wf  a^'e  agreed  that  no  wan  can  conrir  ue  in 
a^&te of  fhflifi edition ,  th.xt  coniinueth  «<>t  in  rtftate'/  Faith, 
Sanni^cai(on,ondfince^eObe!iiencr. 

Prop.  9  ti'e  are  agreed  lamfure  that  no  man  at  age  if'y^flifitd 
before  he  Repent  and  Believe. 

Prop.  10   And  v?e  are  agreed  that  this  Repenting  ^^ndTelleving 
i^boththe  matter  of  the  Gofpel-Precept,  and  the  Cond  cion  of 

M  m  the 


(166-) 


the  Protnire.  Chrtfi  hath  madt  «vtr  to  ui  himftlfwith  his  imfmti 
RighttoHfnefmndKingiim^  o*  condititn  that  wirtfent  anibe- 
lievt  in  him. 

prop.  n.  It  cannot  then  be  denied  thu  Faith  and  Rtpentance  he- 
■InghotbtheDiiiy  comtninded,  and  the  Condition  reqa'ited  and 
pcrformcd^y*  trttlj  a  particular  fpccial  Rightcoafnefs,  fubordi- 
natero  Chriftand  his  Righre^ufnefs ,  in  order  to  our  further 
parctcipation  of  him.and  from  him. 

Prop.  I z.  /indUftlj  itspifi  difpttte  that  this  pcrfonal  Righ- 
teoufnefs  of  Faith  and  Repentance,  is  not  to  he  called  a  Le- 
gal, hat  ^«  Evangelical  Righteoufnefs,  hecaufe  ii  is  the  Gofpil 
that  both  coramandeth  thim^  And  proraifeth  life  to  thofe  that  per- 
form them. 

Thus  mechinks  all  that  I  defire  U  granted  already  :  what  Ad- 
verfary  could  a  man  dream  of  among  Proteftants  in  fuch  t 
Caufe?  Agreement  feemeth  to  prevent  the  neceffity  of  a  further 
Difpute. 

To  be  yet  bricfcr,and  bring  it  nearer  an  IfTac ;  If  any  thing 
of  the  main  The  fit  here  be  denyed,  it  rauft  be  one  of  thcfe  three 
things.  I .  That  there  is  any  fttch  thing  as  Faith  ,  Repen- 
tance or  Sandification.  2.  Or  that  they  (hould  be  called  an 
Evangelical perfonalRighteoufnefs.  g.  Or  ihat  they  arc«fff/l 
fary  to  fufiif cation  and  Salvtaion  :  The  firft  is  de  exi^tn- 
ttA  rei  I  The  fecond  is  de  nomine  :  The  third  ii  de  ufu  ^ 
fine* 

The  firft  no  man  but  a  Heathen  or  Infidel  will  deny. 

And  for  the  fecond  ,  that  this  name  is  fit  for  it,  I  prove 
by  parts,  i.  It  may  and  rouft  be  called  A  Right eonfne ft, 
3.  Cd  Perfonal  Righteoufnefs*  3.  zAn  Evangelical  Righteosef' 
vef:. 

2 .  As  Righteoufneft  fignificth  the  H-Ahit  by  which  we  give  to 
alt  their  own,  fo  this  is  RighteoHfnefs.  For  in  Regeneration 
she  foubl  is  habituated  co  give  up  it  fclf  to  God  as  his  own,  and 
So  give  up  all  we  have  to  him,  and  to  love  and  ferve  all  where 
ihis  lojvcand  fervice  doth  require  it.  No  true  habit  is  fo  excellent 
H^tt  which  is  given  in  Regeneration. 

3'  The  fiftcere  performance  of  the  'Dmief  required  of  as  by 


(26'/') 

the  Evangelical  Precipty  is  a  /»trrr  JSvangtUcal  Righmufnefi  : 
But  our  firft  turning  to  God  in  Ghrift  by  faith  tnd  Repen- 
tance, is  the  fincere  performance  of  the  duties  required  of  us 

by  the  Evangelical  Precept.  Ergo. Object.  The 

Co/pel  recjuireth  aEitiAl  external  Obedience  and  perfeverance  aifa. 
y^nfvf.  Not  at  the  firft  inttant  of  Converfion'-  For  tKatin- 
hant,  he  that  Btlitveth  and  Rtftnttth,  doth  fincerely  do  the 
Duty  required  by  it :  and  afterward,  he  that  conthueth  herein 
with  Ex prejftve  Obedience,  which  is  then  part  of  thisRighte- 
oufnefs. 

3»  The  true  Performance  of  the  Conditions  of  Juflificatton 
and  Salvation,  impofcd  in  the  Gofpel-Promife,  is  a  true  gof- 
pel  Righteeufnefs :  But  Faith  and  Repentance  at  the  firfl,  and 
Jinccrc  Obedience  added  afterward^are  the  true  performance  of 
ihcfe  Conditions.    Ergo. 

4.  It  is  commonly  called  by  the  name  oi  Inherent  Righte- 
ottfntfi,  by  all  Divines  with  one  Confcnt :  therefore  the  name  of 
[^  RighteoHfuefs  ]  is  paft  controverfie  here. 

5.  That  which  in  Judgement  muft  be  his  j«y?/;j<»  caufe,  the 
Righteoufnefs  of  his  caufe,  is  fo  far  the  Right ecnfnefs  of  hii  per- 
fan  :  (  for  the  perfon  rauft  needs  be  righteous  quc^i  kanc  cau- 
f^Wt  as  to  that  caufe)  Butour  Faith  and  Repentance  will  be 

much  of  the  Righteoufnefs  of  our  caufe  at  that  day  (  for  the 
,  Tryal  of  us  will  be,whether  we  are  true  Believers,  and  penitent 
or  not ;  and  that  being  much  of  the  caufe  of  the  day, we  muft 
needs  be  righteous  or  unrighteous  ss  to  that  criufe  .-  \  there- 
fore our  Faith  and  Repcncance  is  much  of  the  Righteoufnf  fs 
of  our  perfonSjdenominatcd  in  refpect  to  the  Ti  yal  and  j  udcc- 
mentofthatday. 

6.  Theholy  Scripture  frequently  calls  it  IVghteoufnefs,  and 
calls  all  true  penitent  Believers,  and  all  that  fincerijy  obt'v 
Qhx\^^\^righteoH!~\  becaufe  of  thefe  qualifications  (  fiippoHnq 
pardon  of  fin,  and  merit  of  Glory  by  Chnft  for  us : )  therefore 
wemay'andmuft  fo  call  them,  Mat.2^.-^j,^6.The» /^'a/ithe 

righteous  anfiver- bf^t  the  righteous  into  life  eter>taljMit.lo. 

41 .  He  that  receiveth  a  righteous  man  in  the  mme  of  a  t  i^hteottf 
man,  fhaO receiver  righteous  mans  reward.  Heb.  1 1  .^.  'By  faith 
Abel  ofered,  • bji  yvhich  he  cbta<ned  Witnefc  that  he  ivm 

Mm    2  right iDUS^ 


(2^^) 


righttoui^  Go  A  tefilfiing  of  hU  Qiftt.    i  Pet. } .  1 2.  For  tht  eju  of 
the  Lord  art  over  the  righteous,  —  i  John  3 ,7.  He  that  doth 
righttofifatfs  is  righteous^  even  as  he  ii  righteous.      Ifa.  5.10.  Saj 
to  the  righteous  it  Jhall  he  ivell  with  hits.     Pfal. 1.5,6.  Mat.5.6, 
20.     Arteftemy  to  the  faith,  is  called  an  enemj  of  right  eotsfnefl. 
Adsi3.io.    2Pef.2.2i.    I  John  2.29.  and  3.10.  Gen.  15.6. 
Ani  he  believed  in  the  Lordfandhe  counted  it  to  him  for  right  f 
oufnrfi.      Pfil.  106.5  I .    R.om.4  3,5.     H^  fdith  «  counted  for 
righceauftcfi.     V€r.^.  Faith  xv.is-reckoned  to  \bt3ih2i;ai  for  righ~ 
tesfifafi.   ver.  22,24.    Therefore  it  ^.ts  imputed  to  him  for  righ' 
tfoafaefs.      Now  it  ^at  r.o':  -ivritten  for  hiifake  aione  ^  that  it 
rvM  imputed  to  hitty  hut  for  us  alfa  to  \>phom  tt  flj*Uhe  imputed^ 
if  Vee  believe  on  him  that  rxifed  up  Jefus  our  Lordfrom  the  dead- 
So  Jim.2.23.   Gal. 3. 6.  IfanjfAji  thathj  [  Faith^^  in  all  thcfe 
Texcs  is  meant  Chrifli  right eoufaefs^  and  not  Faith^  I  will  bc- 
kivs  them  when  I  take  Scripture  to  l>e  intelligible  only  by  them, 
and  that  God  did  not  write  it  to  have  it  underftood .     But  tbac 
Faith  is  imputed  or  accounted  to  us  for  Rightcoufnefsinafenfc 
meerly  fubordinate  to  Chrifts  righteoufnefs  ,  by  which  we 
arc  juitified,  I  eafily  grant.      As  to  Satisfa^ion  af\d  LMerit 
we  have  no  righccoafnefs  but  Chrifts,  but  a  Covenant  and  Law 
we  are  ftill  under,  and  not  redecmedto  be  lawlefs  ;  and  this 
Covenant  is  ordained,  as.  the  way  of  making  over  Chrift  and 
his   meritorious  righcecufafif&;,  and  life  to  us  :  and  therefore 
they  being  given  or  madeoiv^oon  Covenant- terms,  thereisa 
pcrfonal  performance  of  t^'  conditions  neccflary  :  and  f6 
that  pcrfonal  performance  is  all  the  righteoufnefs  inherent  or 
proprix:.iSliMiiy  tihat  God  reqiiireth  of  us  now,  whereas  by  the 
fir  ft  Covenant  pcrfe(5k  Obedience  was  required  as  neceflary  to 
life.    Sothat  in.pointof  meer  perfonal  performance  our  own 
Faith  is  accepted;  and  imputed  or  accounted  to  us  for  Righte- 
oufnefs,, that  is-,  G/}d^iilreefui''e  no  more  as  neceffarj  tojuflifi* 
cMii>nMtottr  o'don  h^ndf,  but  that  We  believe  in  the  righteoufnefs 
af  another*  and  accept  a  ReJeemer  C  though  once  he  required 
more;  )  But  as^tothe/ufij/}/-*^  of  the  Juftice  of  theoflfended 
Majefty,  and  the  meriting  of  life  with  pardon ,  &c.  So  the 
Righteouftiefs  of  Chrift  is  our  only  Right  eouf»efs.    But  nothing 
IQ  Scripta^e  is  niore  plain  chen  that  Faich  it  feif  isXaid  to  be  ac- 

counud. 


WJ  - 


9iUnttdtousforRighitoHfnefs\  and  not  only  Chrijis  oVenriih* 

■uoufnifs :  He  that  will  not  take  thii  for  proof,  muft  cxpcd  no 

Scripture  proof  of  any  thing  from  me. 

Efh.  4.  J4.    Tht  new  mttn  nfter  God  it  ere  Attain  rigbteouf- 

ntfi.    Many  other  Texts  do  call  our  firft  Converfion,  orftate 

of  Grace,our  faith  and  repentance  ,  and  our  fincere  obedii^nce 

by  the  name  oi  Right  eon fneft* 

2.  And  then  that  it  may,  and  that  moft  fitly  be  called  at\ 

i?t/4«^f//(r4/ righteoufnefs,  I   will  not  trouble  the  Reader  to 

prove,  left  I  feem  tocenfurehii  underftanding  as  too  ftupid. 

Its  cafic  to  try  whether  our  Faith  and  Repentance  ,   our 
Inherent  Righteoufncfs ,  do  more  anfwer  the  Precepts  and 

Promifeof  Chiift  in  the  Gofpel ,   or  thofe  of  the   Law  of 

workj. 

3 .  And  that  this  is  a  perfonal  righteoufnefs,  I  have  lefs  need 
to  prove  :  Though  it  isChrift  that  purchajed  it  (  and  fo  it  may 
be  called  the  right eoufnt ft  of  Cbrifi  )  and  the  Spirit  that  vfork^- 
tth  it  in  us,yetitswethaEarcthe  J'«^;*fl/andthe/4^r«f/as  to 
the  aft. 

It  being  therefore  pift  doubt  that,  1.  Thcthingitfelfis 
9X'iJ}tnt  and  tftct^Ary.  2.  That  rlghteoufnefs  i$  afitnAme  for  it. 
3.  All  that  remains  to  be  proved  is  the  life  of  ic^  ^y!ceihtr  it 
be  nectjfurj  to  Jujiifvcaticn  and  Salvation.  And  here  the  com- 
mon agreement  of  Divines,  (except  the  Antiaomiam)  doth  favc 
us  the  labour  of  proving  this ;  for  they  alt  agree  that  FaUh  and 
Repentance  are  neccflary  to  our  fir  ft  Juflificatioti  ;  and  that 
fincere  obedience  alfo  is  neceffary  to  our  Juftification  at  Judgc- 
ment.and  to  our  Salvation.Sothat  here  being  noconteovcrficj 
will  not  make  my  felf  nccdiefs  work. 

Obejd.  I  But  faith  andrepivtaKct  are  not  necejfary  to  fufiijicar 
ticn  qua  juftitia  qiaedam  Evangelica,  under  the  netionofar'gh- 
teoufnefs^hut  faith  as  an  Injlrurr.ertt ^<zndrtfer,Mnce  as  a  qH*ltfjing 
condition. 

%yinfiv.  I,  Weare  not  now  upon  thequeftion  under  what 
notion  thefe  are  neccHary.  U  fulfiteth  to  the  proof  of  our  pre- 
fent  Thejis^ihzi  a  perfonal  Evangel  cal  Rightcoufncfs  is  necefTa- 
ry .whether  sjua  tali4  cr  nor.  M  m  3-  2.  But . 


t.  But  the  plain  truth  is,    i .  Remotely,  in  refped  of  its  na- 
bsral  Aptiiude  to  its  office,  faith  is  neceflary  bccaufc  it  is  a  Re^ 
ceiling  A^^  and  therefore  fitted  to  ^fruGift ,  and  an  A^tni- 
ing  Ad  ,  and  therefore  fitted  to  a  fupernatural  Revelation : 
And  hence  Divines  fay,  It  jujlifitth  as  nn  iKftrnmenti  calling  its 
Receptive  ntiture  t   Metaphorically   tin  Ifijfrftment  :  which  ifl 
this  fenfe  is  true.     And  Repentance  is  ncceffary,  bccanfe  it  is 
that  Return  to  God,  and  recovery  of  the  foul  which  is  the  end 
of  Redemption,  without  which  the  following  ends  cannot  be 
attained.     The  Receptive  nature  of  Faith,  and  the  tiifpafitite 
ufeoi  Repentance^  may  beaflignedas  Rcafons,  why  God  made 
them  conditions  ef  the  Tromife  :  as  being  their  aptitude  thereto. 
2.  But  the  nearefl  reafon  of  their  Inter ijt  and  Nece/Jitj^  isbc- 
caufc  by  the  free  conflitution  of  God,   they  are  made  condi- 
tions in  thatPromife  thatconferrethjuftificationand  Salvati- 
on, determining  thatwithout  thefe  they  ftiallnot  behad,and 
that  whoever  believethfhall  notpcrifh,  and  if  we  repent,  our 
(ins  (hall  be  forgiven  us.    So  that  this  is  the  formal  or  neareft 
Reafon  of  their  neceflity  and  interefl,  that  they  are  the  con. 
diiions  of  the  Covenant,   fo  made  by  the  free  Donor,  Promi- 
mifer,   Teftator.    Now  this  which  in  the  ^r/?i»/?4«^  and  con- 
fideration  is  a  condition,  is  in  the  next  infiant  or  confideration, 
a  trne  Evangelical  Righteoufntfs^  as  that  Condition  is  a  T^nty 
in  refped  to  the  Precept ;  and  as  it  is  our  Title  to  the  benefit  of 
thePromife,  and  fo  is  the  Covenant- performance,  and  as  it  hath 
refped  to  the  fentenccof  Judgement,  where  this  will  be  the 
caufeof  the  day,  whether  this  Condition  ivas  performed  or  not. 
It  is  not  the  Condition  oi  impofed,  but  as  performed^    on  which 
we  become  juftified  :  And  therefore  as  [entential  Jujiijicati- 
en  is  pafl  upon  the  proof  of  this  perfonal  Righteoufnefs,  which 
is  our  performance  of  the  condition,  on  which  we  have  Title 
to  Chrift  and  Pardon,and  eternal  life  ;  even  fo  our  juftiftcaticn 
in  the  fenfe  of  the  Law  or  Covenant^  is  on  fuppofition  of  this 
fame  performance  of  the  Condition,  as  fuch  ;  which  is  a  cer- 
tain Righteoufnefs.   If  at  the  laft  Judgement  we  ureftntentially 
jufiified  by  it  as  it  is  ejuadant  jttfitia,  a  Righteoufnefs  fubordi- 
natc  to  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs,  (  which  is  certain,  )  then  in 
Law- fenfe  wc  are  jyjtifiakli  by  it  on  the  fame  account.    For  to 

be 


(170 

^eJMf^tfitdlnpiitt  ofUxv^  is  nothing elfe  then  to  h^JHJiifiM.oi 
jnflifisAninSiOy  fentence  and  execatioK  according  to  that  Law  : 
fo  that  its  clear  that  a  perfonAl  Righteoufaeft  ^  cjha  tali^,  is  nccef- 
fapy  to  Jti^tficMtioH,  and  not  only  f  «£  talii  ;  though  this  be  be- 
yond our  Qaeftion  in  hand,  and  therefore  t  add  it  but  for  elMci- 
elation  and  ex  abnncianti. 

ObjeA.  2.  If  this  befo^  thtn  men  are  right eota  before  God  doth 
juftifiethenu. 

^nfw.  I.  Not  with  that  Righteoufnefs  by  which  he 
juftificth  them.  2.  Not  Righteoufnefs  fimply,  abfolutelyor 
univcrfally,  but  only /??««</«/»  .7  W,  with  a  particular /Jtj^kf- 
oufnefs.  3.  This  par ticnUr  Righteoufnefs  is  but  the  means  to 
pofTefs  them  of  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs,  by  which  they  are  mate- 
rially and  fully  juftifled.  4.  There  is  not  a  moments  diftance  of 
time  between  them  :  For  as  foon  as  we  believe  and  repent  we 
arc  made  partakers  of  Chrift  and  his  Righteoufnefs,  by  a  raeec 
refultancy  from  the  Pfomifeof  the  Gofpel.  5.  Who  de» 
nyeth  that  we  have  Faith  and  Repentance  before  JuftiHca* 
cion  ? 

Obje(9'.  3.  But  according  to  thii  DoSiritte  Voe  are  jf*fiified 
hefore  rve  are  jtijiified  -  For  he  that  ii  Righteous  is  confii' 
tuted  jufif  and/h  is  jitjiifahle  in  fftdgement,vhich  u  to^e  jufii^td 
in  Law. 

Anfr».  Very  true  :  But  we  are  as  is  faid,  made  juft  or  jufti- 
fied  but  with  a  particuU^^  and  not  an  univerfat  Righteoufnefs  j 
which  will  nic  donominate  theperfon  fimplya  Righteous  oc 
Juftified  perfon  .-  we  are  fo  far  cured  of  our  former  Infidelity 
and  Impenitency,  that  we  are  true  penitent  Believers  before 
our  fins  are  pirdoncd  by  the  Promife  :  and  fo  we  are  in  order 
of  nature  (not  of  time  j  firft  juftifiable  againft  thefalfe  Accu- 
fation,  that  .v:  are  impenitent  Vnbelievers^  before  we  are  jufti- 
Hable  agatnft  the  true  arcMfaion  of  all  our  fts  ,  anddefert  of 
Hell.  He  that  by  inhercn:  Faith  and  Repentance  is  not  firft 
Juftifiable  againft  the former  faife  charge,  cannot  by  the  blood 

and 


C^yi) 


} 


land  merits  of  Chrift  be  juftifiable  againft  the  latter  true  accuft^ 
tion.  For  Chrift  and  Pardon  are  given  by  the  Covenant  of 
Grace.to  none  but  penitent  Believers. 

ObjeA.  4.  B;  this  you  confound  fufi{ficatio»  att^  SanSfiJicd' 
on  :  forinhtrint  Righteoufnefs  btlongs  not  to  fitfiificatioa,  hut  to 
Sanilification. 

Jnf^.  Your  Affirmation  is  no  proof,  and  my  diftinguifli- 
ing  tbemisnot  confounding  them.  Inherent  Righteoufnefs 
in  its  iirft  feed  and  ads  belongs  to  Sanftifrcation,  as  its  Begin* 
*"£%  or  firft  pat£,  or  root ;  And  to  Juflification  and  Pardon  as  a 
Means  or  Condition:  But  Inherent  Righteoufnefs,  in  iisjirength 
and  progrefs,  belongs  to  SanEiif  cation  as  the  lP^ after  of  it,  and 
to  our  fina\fufiification  in  Judgement  as  p^rt  of  the  me  am  or 
condition. 'but  no  otherwife  to  our  firft  fHftffication,ihisr\  as  anc- 
ccflary /r»»V  or  ctnfeqtient  of  it. 

Objed.  5.  By  this  means  you  make  SanElification   to  go  hi* 
fore  ^ftfttjication^  at  a  Condition  or  means  to  it'.xthen  Divines  com'. 

monly  put  it  after, 

Anp^,    I.   Mr.  Pemble,  and  thofc  that  follow  him,  put 
^andification  before  all  true  Juftification,  ( though  they  call 
Cods  immanent  eternal  Aft,a  precedent  Juftification. )  2.  The 
cafe  is  caHe,  if  you  will  not  confound  the  verbal  part  of  the 
controverfic  with  the  Real.     What  is  it  that  you  call  San- 
Eiification?  i.  If  it  be  the  firft  fpecial  Grace  in  Ad  or  Habit, 
fo  you  will  confefs,  l\\2it  San^Hfication  ^otih  firft;  For  we  re- 
pent and  believe  before  we  arc  pardoned  or  Juftified.  2.  If  it  be 
any  further  f/f^rf^/ or  fruits,  or  exercife  ofGrace,  then  we  are 
agreed  that  Jufi'fication  gocth  before  it.  3 .  If  ir  be  both  iegitj- 
ing  and  progrefs^  faith  and  obedience  that  you  call  Sannificationy 
then  part  of  it  is^f/or#  Juftification,  and  part  after.     All  this  is 
plain ;  and  that  which  I  think  we  are  agreed  in. 
But  here  I  am  invited  to  a  confideration  of  fpfne  Arguments 

of  a  new  Opponent,  Mr.  Warner  in  a  book  of  the  Ol]tB  and 
OJpce  of  Faith.  What  he  thought  it  his  Duty  to  oppofe,  I  rake  it 

to 


Ci70 

to  be  my  Duty  to  defend  :  which  of  us  Is  guided  by  the  ligfit 
of  God,!  muft  leave  to  the  illuminated  to  judge,whcn  they  have 
compared  our  Evidence. 

LMr.  W.   /  tioi^  come  to  fljexv  that  holh  thtfe  kjf^dt  ofRighte' 
oufnefs,  Legal  and  Evattgtlical,  art  not  abfolutelj  y.cce^arj  to 

Jujltfcatio??.      — ^  do    tindtrtake    the    ?{jgat  ve  , 

and  voill  endeavour  to  prove  it  bj  thtfe  dtmo»[lraticni.  Argu- 
ment I.  If  thinlt  in  thtmfelvet  contrAdiilorj  cannot  be  fifty ib' 
edtothefameperjonoraUion^thfK  both  the fe  kinds  of  Figbtccuf- 
nefi  are  not  abfoiuteljinecef^ry  to  make  up  ettr  J'tfiificauon  :  But 
things  in  themfehes  contradictory  cannot  be  afcrtbedtothe  fitne 

perfon  or  aU  ions  ^Therefore Thefequell  if  thus  proved  bj  Paul. 

If  it  ber-f  "^ork^f^  it  ii  no  more  of  Grace  '.  ifofCjrace^  then  it  t^ 
nomoreof  workj.  fVhat  are  therefore  theft  two  kinds  of  High' 
teoufnefsjhut  contradi^crj  to  each  ether  ?  And  therefore  it  Jeemetb 
illogical  Theologie  to  predcate  them  of  the  fame  pirfon  er  fi^.c.  1 2. 
pagA^A- 

Alr.fa>.  Reader,  Icravc  thy  pardo<n  for  troubling  thee  wirh 
the  Confutation  of  fuch  Impcrcinencies ,  that  are  called  P/» 
monQrations  :  It  is  I  that  have  ihc  bigger  part  of  the  trouble: 
But  how  (hould  I  avoid  ic  without  wrong  to  the  Truth  ?  See- 
ing (  would  you  think  ic  /  )  there  arc  fome  Reader*  that 
cannot  difcern  the  vanity  of  fuch  Arguings  without  Affi- 
flance. 

I.  Whata  grofs  ahufe  is  this  to  begin  with,  to  conclude 
that  thefe  two  forts  of  Righteoufncf*  r.re  not  r.QCc{[u)[_forrake 
fipytm  Inf^ifcation^when  the  Qjeftion  was  only  whether  they 
are  neceffary  [  to^  our  Juftificatior.  [  Uitakjng  vp  J  exprcfTcth 
the  proper  caufalityof  the  conftiturive  caules,  (  matter  and 
form,  )  and  not  of  the  efficient  or  final;  reiuch  lefs  the  Intc- 
reft  of  ail  other  means,  fuch  as  a  condition  is.  So  that  I  grant 
him  his  condufion.takingjuftification  as  we  now  do  Our  Faith 
or  Repentance  goeth  not  to  make  it  up. 

And  yet  on  the  by,  Khali  add, that  if  any  man '.v ill  needs 
take  Juftificjtion  for  Sandification,  oras  thsPap'fte  do  cfw- 
preher.fivelj  for  Sandification  and  Pardon  both  (  a^  fume  Pro- 

Nn  tcftant 


, 


(^74) 

Keftant  Divines  think  it  is  ufed  in  feme  few  Texts )  in  that  large 
fcnfe  our  Faith  and  Repentance  are  part  of  otir  juUifying 
Rigbteoufnefi.  Bur  I  do  nocfoufethe  word,  (  Though  T'/E?/- 
lip  (^odurcHs  have  writ  ac  large  for  it.  ) 
2.1  deny  his  Confequencc  :  And  how  is  it  proved?  By  reciting 
F»i«// words,/?5A».i  1  6,  Which  contain  not  any  ofthe  terms  in 
the  queftionPWfpeaks  of  EIedion:we  of  JuftifTicacion(chough 
that  difference  I  reg^ird  not.)  PuhI  fpeaksof  rvorkr^  and  we 
fpeak  of  Evangelical  Faith  and  Repentance.  In  a  word  there- 
fore I  anlwer.  The  works  that  Paul  fpeaks  of  are  inconfiftenc 
with  Grace  in  Juftification  (  though  not  contradidory ,  but 
contrary,  what  ever  Mr.  w'.fay.-jbut  Faith  and  Repentance  are 
not  thofe  works  ^  and  therefore  na  contrariety  is  hence 
proved.  Here  is  nothing  therefore  but  a  rafh  Aflertionof 
Mr.  tv.  to  prove  thefe  two  forts  of  Righteoufnefs  contra- 
didory. 

Be  judge  all  Divines  and  Ghriftians  upon  earth  :  Did  you 

ever  hear  before  from  a  Divine  or  Chriftian,  that  imputed  and 
inherent  Righteoufnefs,  or  Juftification  and  Sanftification,or 
Chrifts  fulfilling  the  Law  for  us,  and  our  believing  the  Gofpel 
and  repenting  were  contradi6lory  in  themfelves  ?  Do  not  all 
that  believe  the  Scripture  ,  believe  that  we  have  a  perfonal 
Righteoufnefs,  a  true  Faith  and  Repentance ,  and  muft  tul- 
fill  the  Conditions  of  the  Promife  •,  and  that  in  refped 
to  thefe  the  Scripture  calls  us  Righteous  ^  (  as  is  before 
proved. ) 

Mr.  Vif.l*  If  the  per  fan  ji^flifiedtj  ofh'tmfelf  ungodly ,  thenLe- 
gal  arJ  Evangelical  Right toufntft  nre  not  both  abfoluttlj  necejfa- 
ryto  our  J  pi  [I  ^cation  :  But  the  ^erfonjuf^ified  (  confideringhim 

;♦?  the  aft  oj j^jifjtng)it  f'tthertfore. -The  Sequel  is  undenj- 

alle-^  becaufe  he  ^}o  it  nr.godlj  is  not  Lfg^Uj  Righteotu  ,  and 
that  the  per j on  noWto  be  jfiflified  iiHngodl)i,is  exprefs  Script  fere,. 
Rom.  4.  s.  Bfi':  tc  him  that  >^orl(_eth  not,  but  bdieveth  n  him  that 
jfij^  fith  the  urgodl)^  kis  faith  is  counted  {or  right eoefntft. 

A)ijVv.  I.  I  fuppofethc  Reader  underftandeth  that  the  Le- 
gal or  rather  Pro-legal  Righteoufnefs,  thatIpleadfor,isChrifts 

Meritfr 


i 


Ivferits  and  SatisfaAion  made  over  to  us,  for  the  effects ;  and 
that  the  pcrfonal  Evangelical  Rinhteoufnefs  is  our  believing  and 
repenting.  Now  that  thcfc  are  both  necefTary,  this  very  Text 
provetb,whicbhecit€th-acainftit.  For  the  neceflity  of  Chrifts 
meritorious  Righteoufnefs  he  will  not  deny  that  it  is  here  imply- 
ed  :  and  the  neceflity  of  our  own  faith  h  twice  expreft,  \To  him 
that  beHeveth:^his  faith  it  counteci  for  righttottfr.efs.  ]  If  ft  be  the 
Bting  of  Faith  that  this  Brother  would  exclude  ic  is  here  twice 
expreft:  U  it  be  only  the  naming  it  \_ariihteoti[»efi~\  That 
name  alio  is  here  expreft.  How  could  he  have  brought  a  plainec 
evidence  againft  himfclf  ? 

2.  Tohis  Argument,  I  diftinguifli  of  {VngodliHe[i'\  If  it  be 
takcnforan  unregencrate  impenitent  unbeliever ,  then  I  deny 
the  Al  nor^  at  ieaft  wfenfu  compcfito  •,  A  perfon  in  the  inftant  of 
Juftificationisnoc  an  unbeliever;  This  Text  fhameth  him  that 
will  affirm  it.  But  if  by  ^JUn^^oMy]  be  meant  [^Sinners,  or  per- 
lons  unjuftifyable  by  the  Aorks  of  the  Law,  who  are  legally  im- 
pious] then  I  deny  the  confequencc  of  the  Major.  Do  I  need 
CO  tell  a  Divine  that  a  man  may  be  a  finner  and  a  penietnt  Be- 
liever ac  once.  The  Syri^ick^  and  £ri{7io^/cl:„tranflating  the  word 
{_  finntrs  J  do  thus  expound  the  Text ;  and  its  the  common  Ex- 
pofitionof  moft  judicious  Divines.  It  is  not  of  the  Apoftles 
meanmgtotcllyou  that  God  juftifieth  impenitent  Infidels,  or 
haters  of  God :  but  that  he  juftifieth  finners,  legally  condemn- 
ed and  unworthy,  yet  true  Belie vers,as  the  Text  expreffeth. 

3  ,  If  any  reject  this  Expofition,  and  will  take  [  ungodly  1  here 
for   Q  the  Impenitent ,  ]   then  the  other  Expofition  folveth 
his  Objection,  "z,/^.  They  were  Impenitent  and  Unbelievers,  in 
the  inftant  next  foregoing,  but  not  in  the  inftant  of  Juftification :  ' 
For  faith  and  Juftincation  afe  in  the  fame  inftant  of  time. 

4.  Rather  then  believe  that  God  juftifieth  InHdels  contrary 
to  the  text, I  would  interpret  this  Text  as  Bez.a  doth  fome  other, 
as  fpeakmgof  Juftification  as  comprehending  both  Converfion 
and  Forgivenels,  even  the  conferring  of  Inherent  and  Imput- 
ed Righteoufnefs  both  :  and  fo  God  juftifieth  Infidels  them- 
felves ;  that  is,  giveth  them  fir  ft  faith  and  Repsntance,and  then 
for^ivenefs  and  eternal  life  in  Chrift, 

5.  But  I  wonder  at  his  proof  of  his  Sequel   {^^eca^fe  he 

N  n  2  Vfho 


who  iiunioMj  is  not  le^aUy  righteitts"}  what  is  that  to  the  Q^e- 
ftion  ?  It  is  Ltgalrigheottfrtefs  in  C^riji  that  Juftification  givcth 
biro:  Therefore  wc  all  fuppofe  he  hath  it  not  before  ;  But  h€ 
is  perfonally  Evangelically  Righteous  as  foon  as  he  Believes,  fo 
far  as  to  be  a  true  performer  of  the  Condition  of  Juftfication  ^ 
and  then  in  the  fame  inttantbe  receiveth  by  Juth'ication  thac 
Rightedbfnefs  of  Chrift  which  anfwcreth  the  Law. 

Mr.  W.  If  nothing  ought  to  he  ajferteJ  by  tu  Vrhicb  over* 
riroftv  tyfpopoiicitl  rcrltiKgs  ,    then  the  ttecefptj  of  a  two-fold 

.  righteoufnefs  ought  not  ts  be  aprtfd  ^   But Ergo. The 

Stcuelts proved hj  this  T^ilemita.  Apo^oHctl  Writings  are  utterly 
agi'.infl  a  trro-foU  Righteoufnefs  in  thu  V¥«r/^  j  thereftre  to  afert 
both  the fe  kinds  ii  to  overthn^  thfir  TPrutrgi,  far  to  wh  a  pur- 
fcfedidPau]  d  (put e  again fl  fhjiification  by  rvo-k/  of  the  X«»», 
if  the  rsghteoufae/sofFuith  were  »ct  fujficletit  ?  And  certainly 
if  both  were  rftjutred  as  abfolutelynecejfury,  it  would *rgue  eX' 
tre^m  ignorance  in  Pau\  if  he  Jhould  not  hAve  kj^own  it^  and  M 
great  unfaithfulnefs  ify&ic.  ' 

y^«/B».Either  this  Writer  owns  the  *wo- fold Righteonfnefs  thae 
he  difputcth  againft,  or  not :  If  he  did  not,  he  were  an  Infidel  oc 
wretched  Heretick  ,  directly  denying  Chrilt  or  Faith  ;For  Chrift 
is  the  one  Righteournefs,and  faith  the  other.  If  he  do  own  them 
(  as  I  donbt  not  at  all  but  he  dorh^  is  it  not  good  fervice  to  the 
Church  to  pour  out  this  oppofition  againft  words  not  under- 
ftood,  and  to  make  men  believe  that  the  difference  is  fo  mate- 
rial as  to  overthrow  (he  Scriptures  ?  But  to  his  Argument,  I 
deny  the  confequence  of  the  Major  ;  and  how  is  it  proved  ?  for- 
aboth  b^  a  DilemmuX  which  other  folks  call  an  Enthymeme)  Of 
which  the  Antecedent  (TAa^  Apofiolical  "ivritings  areagamfl  a 
iwo-fold  righteou/nefs)\s  proved  by  this  Writers  word.  A  learn- 
ed proof  !  into  which  his  Difputations  arc  ultimately  refolved. 
It  is  the  very  work  of  ''Pa»liE^\Mcszo  prove  the  necefllty  of 
this  Two-fold  Righteoufnefs  Cunlefs  you  will  with  ihePapifts 
call  it  rather  two  parts  of  one  Righteoufnefs, )  Chrifts  merits 
^nd  mans  faith,  one  in  our  furety,  the  other  wrought  by  hira  in 

our  /elves. 

Bur, 


(2-77) 


Bat,  faith  he,  towhst  purpofcdid /^Wdifputeagtinft  Jufti- 
fication  by  the  works  of  the  Law,  If  the  Righteoufnefs  of  faith 

were  not  I'utficient? 1  anfw/cr  yoUji.Becaufc  no  man  hath 

a  perfonal  legal  Righteoufncfs ;  But  ?»i«/ never  difputcd  againft 
a  legal  lltghceoufnels  in  Chnft,  or  his  fuelling  the  i-a:v,  or  be- 
ing made  a  curfc  for  us.  Do  you  think  he  did  ?  2.  A  R  ghte- 
eofnef*;  of  faith  is  futficicnc :  for  ic  fi^mieth  this  two-fold  .  ig'i» 
teoufnefs.  1.  Thatrighteoufnefswh'n  faith  acceptcth  ,  which 
is  ["  of  pAiih  3  beciu'e  proclnrneJ  in  the  G  ifpel ,  and  is  the 
c^^ffl  of  Faith -,  and  yet  it  is  leg  il,  tnthar  ic  wasiCi^formity 
totbeLaw,and<acisraccion  to  the  Law-giver.  2.  Faittj  it  felf^ 
which  is  a  particular  fubfervienr  EviogchcilRigetcoufncfs,  for 
the  application  and  poflrjffion  of  the  former. 

And  now  was  here  a  fie  occafi'3 1  co  Ipean  (o  rcpro^ich  fully  of 
7*4«/,  as  cxtream  ignorant,  or  unfaitbfull  or  imma'iis  foohjit  ? 
and  all  becaufe  he  would  not  deny  either  Chrift  or  Faith  ?  Sure 
T>aHl  hath  let  us  fee  by  revealing  both,  that  he  was  neither 
ignorant,unfaithfuli  nor  a  Sophifter. 

CMr.  W.^.If  both  Leg^l  and  Evangelic 4{  rifhteottftiefs  ^erg^ 
thtti  re^jnired  to  tht  furpoje  of inji'f)iig,theyi  it  muii  be  becaufe  the 

Evangelic*!  is  of  it  felf  infufficient.  But For  if  {^hrijls  righ' 

teotffnef  be  tn'^M^cient  to  Satvation,loe  Vper^  not  a  fafficient  Savi- 
oHr^  And  If  the  Righteonfnefs  of  Faith  tn  him  rvere  ofttfelfinfuff'' 
tnt. 

Anfi9.  By  thistime  I  am  tempted  to  repent  that  I  medled 
with  this  Brother.  If  he  live  to  read  over  a  reply  or  two,  he 
may  poflibly  underftand  them  that  he  writes  againfl.  He  will 
prove  that  a  Leg*l  Righteoufnefs  is  not  neceffary  ,  becaufe 
Chrilh  righteoufnefs  (  which  is  it  chat  I  called  legal  )  is  fuffi- 
cient.  Its  fjlfficient  alone:  therefo'c  not  NecefAry.  Am  not 
I  line  to  have  a  fair  hind  think  you  of  this  Difputer  ?  To  his 
Argument  once  more  I  diftinguilh:  Evangelical  righteoufnefs 
is  twofold.  I.  That  which  theGofpel  reveaieth  and  offereth  i 
and  this  isChrifts  righteoufnefs,  therefore  called  Evangelical : 
but  alfo  Legal^  becaufe  ic  anfwered  the  rule  of  the  Law  of 
works,and  its  ends.  2,Tha;  which  the  G.ofpei  hath  made  the 

Nn  3  Con--- 


(278) 

Condicion  of  our  part  in  Chrlft  and  his  rightaoufnefs :  and  this 
is  Faith  it  felf.    Both  thefeare  fufficient  to  J  unification  :  but 
Faith  is  neither/«j^r<f«f ,  nor  is  Fuith  without  Chrifts  legal  righ- 
tcoufnefs  :    And  Chrift  is  fufficlent  Hjpotheticaliji ,    but  will 
not  be  ffeBuAl  to  our  Juftification  wittfout  Faith  (  and  re- 
pentance, j 
But  perhaps  this  Writer  means  only  to  fliew  his  offence  againft 
my  naming  Chrifts  righteoufners  legal.   If  that  be  fo,  i .  1  have 
given  in  my  reafons,  becaufc  there  can  be  no  better  reafon  of  a 
name  then  from  the  form  .-  and  the  form  of  Chrifts  righceouf- 
nefs  beiffg  relative,  even  a  conformity  to  the  Law  of  works 
(  and  to  the  peculiar  Coverianc  of  redemption,  )  I  thought 
did  fufficiently  warrant  this  name.  z.  The  rather  when  I  find  not 
only  that  he  is  faid  to  fulfill  the  Law  and  all  righceoufnefs ,  and 
be  made  a  curfe  for  us,but  alfo  to  be  righteous  with  that  rightc- 
oufnefs,which  is  denyed  of  us^which  can  be  none  but  a  legal  oc 
prolegal  righteoufnefs.  3 .  But  yet  if  the  name  [_  ^f  ?-^/]  be  all, 
I  could  eafiiy  have  given  this  Brother  leave  to  differ  from  me 
about  a  name  without  contention,  and  methinks  he  might  have 
done  the  like  by  me. 

.  yJ^r.  W.  Ob'l^Gt.But  rehat  if  works  andfMth  "^ere  hth  of  them 
(ippljfed  t0  fTochre  our  fufitfic^tion  f 

A»[y«.  This  Objedion  yet  further  fliews,  that  the  Author 
underftands  me  not  (  if  it  be  me,as  I  have  reafon  to  judge  that 
he  writeth  againft  )  for  he  fuppofeth  that  its  works  that  I  call  a 
legal  Righteoufnefs,  when  1  ftillteil  him  it  is  Chrifts  fatisfadi- 
on  and  fulfilling  the  Law^  of  wbich  our  faith  or  works  are  no 
part,  but  a  fubordinate,  particular,  Evangelical  Righteouf- 
neff. 

%, 

Mr.  W.5.  If  both  thefe  kjnds  of  Righteoufyiefs^tre  ^^bfolHtely 
neceffarj^  then  >Xhere  one  of  them  is  \K>anting  in  a  perfon^  there  can 

be  no  Juftification  of  th.it  perfort.    But Ergo. "^ For 

Whtre  Veas  any  Legal  Rightcoufnefs  of  the  good  thief  o»  the  Crofs, 
condemned  for  legal  tCfirighleoHfneJs  ? 

Anfrv. 


Jnfrv.  I  deny  your  minor.  The  converted  thief  had  a  legal 
righteoufnefs  hanging  on  the  next  Crofs  to  him;  even  Chrift 
that  then  was  road^curfe  for  him,  and  was  obedient  to  the 
death  of  the  Croff?^  begin  to  be  a  weary  in  writing  fo  much 
only  to  Cell  men  that  you  underftand  rae  not. 

CMr.  \N,6.  If  legal  Righteoufn(fi  be  thu  necefirilj  to  be  jow^ 
ed  "A'ith  oftr  EvangcUcal  Righteoufmfs  to  Jtsjtificatieii^  then  there 
wuli  be  ttpo  fcrrtJAl caftfes  cfffifiification, 

Anfrv.  I  deny  your  confcquence.  If  the  formal  caufe  con- 
fiftin  remifiion  and  imputation  as  you  fay  ,  then  Chrifts  meri- 
torious righteoufnefs  is  noneof  th«  Form.hwt  the  AUtttr.  And 
if  befides  that  Alatter  a  fubftrvient  particular  righteoufnefsi^of 
faith  )  be  ncceffiry  as  the  condition  of  our  Title  to  Chrift  j  this 
makes  not  two  forms  of  this  Juftification.  2.  And  yet  I  grant 
you  that  it  infers  a  fubfervicnt  Juftification  that  hath  another 
form,  when  you  are  made  a  Believer,  or  juftified  againft  the 
falfe  charge  of  being  no  Believcr(or  penitcnt)this  i5  not  remiffi- 
on  of  fin, but  another  form  and  thing. 

Mr.  W.7.  That  ^hlch  msiKeth  void  C'hrifis  death^cdnnot  be 
4tbfoluteh  necejfary  to  Juftijic<iti9n.  S«/  /egai  righteoufnefs  muk^ei 
voidhts  Death^Qz\.l.ii. 

ylnf^.  Its  a  fad  cafe  that  we  muft  be  charged  with  making 
void  Chrifts  Death,  for  faying  that  he  is  legally  Righteous,  by 
fatisfying  and  fulfilling  the  Law  ;  and  that  this  is  all  the  legal 
righteoufnefs  that  we  have.  I  am  bold  therefore  to  deny  the 
Minor :  yea  and  to  reverfe  it  on  you,  and  tell  you,tbat  he  that 
denyeth  Chrifts  legal  Righteoufnefs,  denyeih  both  his  death 
and  obedience.  The  Text  ^/«/.2.2i.  fpeaksnotof  the  Law,  as 
fulfilled  by  Chrift,  but  by  us.  Righteoufnefs  comes  not  by  our 
keeping  the  Law,  but  it  came  by  Chrifts  keeping  it  :  yet  fo,that 
the  Gofpel  only  giveth  us  that  righteoufnefs  of  his^ 

^T/r.  W.8.  That^hich  concurs  with  another  efficienf ,  mttfl 


C28o) 

have  botU  an  apt'ttuie  and  ConjiiteMce  to  product  the  efeCi  :'  bnt 
the  La'^h  ,  And  confeqftentlj  Le^d  righteoftfnefs  hath  no  aptitude 
toffivelife^Gi\-l.2. 

tyfnf^.  This  is  Difputing  enough  to  makFone  tremble  ,  and 
loath  Difputing.  Is  there  no  aptitude  in  Chrifts  legal  Righte- 
oufnefstogiveuslife  ?  The  Law  doth  noc^tV^rwrighteournefs, 
but  it  denominnteth  Chrift  righteous  for  fulfilling  it  (  and  the  . 
Law-giver  for  fatisf^'ing  )  and  to  that  it  had  a  fufficient  apti- 
tude. TheTextC/<j/.3.2.  faith  truly  that  the  Law  giveth  not 
life  :  but  firft  it  fpeaks  of  the  Law  as  obeyed  by  us,  and  not  by 
Chrift,  that  fulfilled  it.  Secondly,  And  indeed  its  fpeaks  of  Mo- 
/«Law;  andnotdiredlyof  that  made  mth  Adait.  Thirdly, 
And  it  denies  not  that  Chrift  fulfilling  it  may  give  us  life,though 
the  Law  it  felfgive  us  none,fo  that  all  this  is  befides  the  bufinefs, 

Mr»  W.  9.  ThAt  IDo^ritte  which  doth  mofi  exalt  the  QrACe  of 
God,  ought  to  be  admitted  before  that  "^hich  doth  leaft  exalt  it  z 
'Bat  the  DoUrine  of  fuf^ification  by  Faith  alofie  ,  04  our  Go^el' 
righteoufnefs  doth  moft  exalt  his  Grace ^and  the  other  left.  Ergo. 

fAnf'if.  Still  mifunderftanding  I  Doth  the  Dodrine  of  faith 
alone  without  Chrift  advance  Grace  ?  Thats  no  faith.  You  do 
not  think  fo  :  that  which  denyeth  Chrift  or  faith  denyeth  Grace. 

Mr.yf.  10.  That  opinion  which  confidf  ret  h  a  per  fen  under 
a  two-fold  Covenant  at  the  fame  time^  ought  not  to  be  admitted  : 
"But  to  require  both  Legal  and  Evangelical  Righteoufnefs  ,  ^  to 
confider  him  under  the  Covenant  of  works  and  Grace  :  I  conclude 
therefore  that  two  forts  of  righteoufnefs  art  vot  necejfarilj  required 
to  our  fu^ification^ 

eyfnfw.  How  far  we  are,  or  are  not  under  the  Covenant  of 
works,  I  will  not  here  trouble  you  by  digreffing,  in  this  ram- 
bling Difpute  to  enquire.  But  to  your  CMinor  1  fay,  this  opini- 
on confidereth  man  only  under  the  curfe  of  the  Law  till  Chrift 
take  it  off  him,by  being  made  a  curfe  for  m ,  and  making  over 
the  fruit  of  his  merits  and  faffcringto  us. 

Mr.Vf.i: 


(z8i) 

Mr.  W.  2 .  Ai  for  the  SuhjeEis  ofthefe  ki'Jiis  of  Kjgkeouf- 
"yiffs,  I  thus  declare,  i .  That  jefm  Chrifi  and  he  alone  mho  v^as 
truly  endued  vith  Legal righteoufnefs^  who  as  he  wof  made  under 
the  La^^  fo  he  did  not  defray  butfulfiH  it ;  and  if  he  had  not  been 
the  JuhjeB  of  Legal  righteoufneft  inhimfelfi  he  con  Id  not  have 
been  the  tAuthor  of  Evangelical  Righteoufnefs  to  tu. 

Anfvf.  Here  after  all  thcfe  Arguments,  I  have  all  that  qranc- 
ed  me  that  I  contend  for  (Tuppofing  the  Imputation  or  Dona- 
tion of  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  to  us,  whether  in  fe  orintfe^Uy 
I  now  difpute  not.)  You  have  here  his  full  confclTion  that  Chrift 
fiad  a  legal  Righteoufnefs :  Let  him  but  grant  the  imputation 
of  this,  and  then  its  ours :  And  then  I  have  granted  him  that 
«:  may  be  alfo  called  Evangelical  in  another  re(pe*i^. 

^'^r,  W.  pag.i66.  I  think,  it  to  be  no  incongruity  in  [peecht  or 
Paradox  in  Divinity,  to  fay  that  Chrtjis  Legil  righteoufnefs  u 
our  Evangelical  righleoufnefi^\  Cor.I.30.  2  Cor.5.2lj€F.23.S. 

Anf^.  Sure  we  fliall  agree  anon,  for  all  the  ten  Arguments. 
Heres  all  granted  but  the  name  as  to  us.  Many  and  many  a 
time  I  have  faid,  that  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  made  ours  is  Legal 
in  refped  to  the  Law  thdt  it  was  a  conformity  to,  and  which  it 
anfwcreth  for  us ;  but  Evangelical  as  declared, and  given  by  the 
Gofpd.  Uur  the  thing  in  queftion  you  now  fully  confefs. 

-   A/r.W.pag.iji.  Thaty[>e  our  felvss  are  not  the  fubje^s  of 
Evangelical  righteoufnefs  ,   /  fjall  endeavour  to  prove  by  thefe 
Arguments,    i .  //  our  Evangelical  righttoufnejs  be  out  dfta  in 
Chrijl ,  then  it  it  not  in  ut,  confifiing  in  the  habit  or  Ads  Qf  faith 
and  Go f^el obedience ,  but  it  is  out  ofta  i :  Chrijl. 

Anfw.  We  fhall  have  fuch  another  piece  of  work  with  this 
point  as  the  former,  to  defend  the  truth  againll:  a  man  that  lay- 
'Cth  about  him  in  the  dark.  1 .  1  have  oft  enough  diftinguifht  of 
Evangelical  righteoufnefs.  The  righteoufnefs  conform  to  the 
/..tip,  and  revealed  and  ^iven  by  the  Go/fel  is  meritorioufly  and 
materially  cut  of  us  in  Chrilh   The  righteoufnefs  conform  to  the 

O  o  '      Go.q)th 


Go^tl^  as  conftituting  the  conduku  of  life,  Q  He  that  hlievtth 
fhatl  not  rerifh  :  Rtfe^it  audbe  converted  iha:  jour  fms  way  he 
blotted  oHt,'\  This  i«  in  our  felvcs  materially,  and  nut  out  of 
as  in  Chrift. 

Mr.W.  zJffatpjfaiiioM  to  Divint  jHftici  vfere  not  given  or 
taufedb)  anj  thin^  tn  Ht  ,  but  by  Chriji  alone  ,  then  Evttngehcal 
ri/kteoulnefj «  in  Chriji  alvne.  Bat  — ^  Ergo  —  without  blood 
no  remijjion. 

Anf^.  Your  proof  of  the  confequence  is  none  ;  but  worfe 
then  filence.  Bcfidcs  the  fatisfaftion  of  Juftice  and  remifllicnof 
fin  thereby  ;  there  is  a  fubfetvicnt  Gofpel  righteoufnefs ,  as  is 
proved,  and  is  undeniable. 

LMr.  W.  5.  If  Evangtliciil  rlgkteoufntfs  be  in  orer  [elves , 
then  ptrfe^  righteoufnefs  u  incur  fdves.  But  thAts  not  Jo.  Ergo. 

Anfw.  Still  you  play  wich  the  ambiguity  of  a  word,and  deny 
that  which  befeems  you  not  to  deny  ,  that  the  fj^lfillmg  of  the 
condition  [  ^«/i>v^  ri""^  ■^»i'f]  is  a  Gofpel-rigpieoufnefs ,  par- 
ticular and  fubfervient  and  imperfc<ft.  The  Saints  have  an  Ijtr 
berentrlghteoufneff ^vjh'ich  h  not  Legal '■  therefore  ic  is  (f-y/jw^*- 
lical.  If  you  fay,»fj«o  righteoufnefs  ,  you  renounce  the  con- 
ftant  voice  of  Scripture.  If  you  fay,  it  is  a  Ltgsl  righteoufnefs 
imperfeft,  then  you  fet  up  Juftification  by  the  works  of  the 
Law,  Ctheunhappv  fate  of  blind  oppofition,  to  do  what  they 
intend  to  undo.  J  tor  there  is  no  righteoufnefs  which  doth  not 
^fiflifie  or  muk*  righteosisin  tantum  :  and  fo  you  would  make 
men  juftified  partly  by  Chrift,  and  partly  by  a  Legal  righteouf- 
nefs of  their  own,  by  a  perverfc  denying  the  fubfervient  Evan- 
gelical righteoufnefs,  without  any  caufe  in  the  world,  but  dark- 
nefs,  jcaloufie,  and  humorous  contentious  zeal.  Yea  more  then 
fo,  wc  have  no  works  but  what  the  Law  would  damn  us  for, 
were  we  judged  by  it.  And  yet  will  you  fay  that  faith  or  in- 
Iherent  rightcoufneh  is  Legal  and  not  Evangelical  ? 

Mr.  W.  4.  IfSvangelic  I  righteoufnefs  Wert  in  c  Hrfeh e / ,<tnd 

did. 


J 


^Jcoyjfifl  either  in  th  habit  or  aCt  offutth  andne'a  ohedicMce^  then 
tip-^n  (he  trterciJiOKof  thofea^f,    cii>  f '[tificafion  rcottlddifcon- 

Anf^.  If  you  thoaght  not  your  word  muft  go  for  proof,you 
would  never  lure  cxpefl  that  wc  (hould  believe  your  Conle- 
quence.  For  i  What  rticw  is  there  of  reafon  that  the  intci  c  fion 
of  the  ad  fliould  caufe  the  celTation  of  that  Juftiftcatifn  which 
is  the  confequcnc  of  the  Habit  (  which  you  put  in  your  Antece- 
dent?) The  Habit  continueth  inour  fleep,when  the  .ids  do  not. 

2.  As  long  as  the  caufe  continueth  (which  is  Chrills  Merits 
«nd  theGofpel-Grant  j  Juftification  will  continue,  \{  the  con- 
dition be  but  fincerely  performed  (For  the  Condition  is  not  the 
caufe,  much  lefs  a  Phyfical  caufe j  But  the  condition  is  fincerely 
performed,  though  we  believe  not  in  out  fl<:ep.  I  dare  not  in- 
ftance  in  your  payment  of  Rent, left  a  Carper  be  upon  my  back; 
biit  fuppofe  you^ive  a  man  a  Icafe  of  Lands  on  condition  he 
come  once  a  moncth,  orweek,  or  day,andfny,  Ithank^joHy  or 
in  t^encraljCrti  condition  he  bt  tkankful.  Doth  his  Title  ceafe 
as  oft  as  he  fhuts  his  lips  from  faying,  /  thaKk,  yon  ?  Thefe  arc 
ftrange  Dodrmes. 

J/r.W.  5.  If  S'ja*igelical  rigkteof4fr,«fs  veere  in  our  ftlvtf, 
a»a  faith  Wuh  our  Go^el-  obedience  ^^ere  that  right eeufrept  then 
he  who  hath  more  or  lefs  faith  or  obtdieKce,vcere  more  or  Iffs  jujfifi' 
ed^and  wore  or  lefs  Evangelically  righteous^  according  to  the  </f- 
g  eet  of  faith  and  obeiience. 

iAnfr,  I  deny  your  Confequence,  confidcring  faith  and  re- 
pentance as  the  Condition  of  the  Promife ;  becaufe  it  is  the  fin- 
cerlty  of  Faith  »nd  llepentance  that  is  the  Condition  ,  and  not 
the  degree  •  and  therefore  he  that  hath  the  leaft  degree  of  fin- 
cere  faith  ,  hath  the  fame  title  to  Chrift  as  he  that  hath  the 
ftrongcft.  *■ 

2.  But  as  faith  and  obedience  refpeft  the  Precept  of  the  Gof- 
pel,and  not  the  Prow//^;  fo  it  is  a  certain  truth,  that  he  that 
hath  mdft  of  them,  hath  moft  Inherent  Rightcoufneff. 

O02  M".W.6. 


(284) 


Mr.  "^.6'  ThAt  ofmion  which  derogAtti  from  the  G lor)  anJ 
EpcciUencj  of^hrifi  above  all  Graces^  and  from  the  excellency  of 
Faith  in  its  Office  of  jrtjlifying  above  other  Graces  ,  ought  not  to  be 
admitted :  But  this  opinion  placing  our  Svangelical  Rtghteouf- 
nefs  in  the  habit,  a^y  or  <Jrace  of  faith  and  GoJfel  obedience  dero  - 
gates  from  bothChrifi  und  F'aiih* 

A'lfv^.  Your  Minor  is  falfe,  and  your  proof  is  no  proof,  but 
your  word.  Your  fimilitude  Qiould  have  run  thus.  If  an  Ad  of 
Oblivion  b/  the  Princes  purchafe,  do  pardon  all  that  will  thank- 
fully accepc  it  and  corns  in  and  lay  down  arms  of  Rebellion  j  it 
isnodcrogatingfromthcPrinccor  pardon  to  lay,  I  accept  it, 
I  ft  and  out  no  longer,  and  therefore  it  is  mine..  If  you  offer  to 
heal  a  deadly  fore  on  condition  you  be  accepted  for  the  Chy- 
lurgion;  doth  it  derogate  from  your  honour  if  your  Patient 
fay,  I  do  confcnt  and  take  you  for  my  Chyrurgion  >  and  will 
lake  your  Medicines? 

Y.our. proof  is  as  vain  and  null,  that  it  derogates  from  faith.' 
What,  that  Faith  (hould  be  this  fubfcrvient  Rightcoufnefs? 
Doth  that  di(honour  it?Or  is  it  that  Repentance  is  con  joyncd  as 
to  our  firfl  Juftification,and  obedience  as  to  that  at  Judgement  ? 
Wbcnyou  prove.eitber  of  thcfcdiQionourable  to  faith,  we  will 
b&Jieveyou  ;  but  itmuft  be  a  proof  that  is  ftrongcr  then  the 
Gcfpelthatisagainftyou.  We  confefs  faith  to  be  the  r*ff«t//«£ 
ConAitia^y  and  repentance  but  the  difpojing  (Condition :  but.both 
are  Conditions,  As  for  Phil.-^^g,  Do  you  not  fee  that  it  is  aga^inft  • 
you  /  I  profefs  with  T^w/j  not  to  have  a  righteoufrnfs  of  my  o^^$ 
^hieh  U  of  the,LaWy  (  which  made  me  loth  to  ca^l  faith  and  ire- 
pentance  a  legal  righteoufncfs  )  but  thit  rvhich  ii  through  tk§ 
faith  of  Chrift^the  righteonfvefs  ^hich  ii  $f  ^odhj  faith  :]fikh 
yoa  fee  is  the  means  of  our  Title  to  Chri'is  Righteouf-, 
nefs  :  And  if  you  deny  faith  it  felf  to  be  any  particular 
Righteoufncfs,  you  mu^  make  it  a  fin,  or  indifferent,  and 
iQntradid  the  Scriptures .  And  prefencly  contradiding  what 
you  have  been  arguing,  for  (  chat  Evangelical  RigbteonT- 
nefs  is  not  in  us  ,  and  we  are  not  the  Subjeds  ef  it :  ) 
You  profefs  pag,  178.    That  Inherent  Right eoufnefs  is  in  ns. 


C^St  ) 


It  fcems  then  either  Inherent  righttottfntjs  is  not  righteoh/- 
ntfs^  or  it  is  not  EvangelicAl  but  Legal.or'ii  is  in  us,and  not  in 
us. 

Had  you  only  pleaded  that  we  are  not  /uftlHed  by  it  as 
a  Righteoufnefs  ,    I  (hould  have  anfwered  you  as  before  orr 
that  point.     Not  as  a  Legal   Righteoufnefs  ;    nor  an  Evan- 
gelical Righteoufnefs    co  ordinate  with  Chrifts    •    but  as  a 
fulfilling,  of  the  Condition  of  thjit  Promife,  which  gives  us 
Chrift,  and  Pardon  ,  and  Lift  ;    by  which  performance  of 
the  Condition  ,  the  Benefit  becomes  ours  by  the  Will  and 
Grant  of    the  free  Donor ;  and  we  are  no  longer  tmpe* 
mrenc  Infidels  ,  but    juft,  and  juftifiabic   from  the  falfe 
charge  of  being  fuch ;    and  fo  of  not  having  part  in  Chrift» 
Its  one  thing  to  be  accufed  of  fin  as  fin   :     And  another 
ahing  to  be  accufed  of  the  fpccial  fin  of  not  accepting  the 
Remedy  :     and  fo  of  having   no    part    in  Chrift  and   his 
Righteoufnefs.     From  the  larcr  we  rauft  have  a  real  Faith 
and  Title  to  Chrift,  which  muft  materially  juftifie  us  :  but 
from  the  former,  even  from  all  fin  that  ever  we  are  guilty 
of.     Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  only  juftifieth  us  materially  and 
itieritoriouny,  and  our  faith  is  but  a  bare  condition. 


Oo  J 


^ 


CiS(J) 


(^  Confutatton  of  the  Error  of<S\ar. 
Warners  1 5'^'  Chapter  about  fuflu 
fication^  and  the  interejl  of  Obedience 
therein. 

■-."*   I' :  .'..!  .7zAq    nil  gni/Sil  "' 

HE  begins  with'k  falfc:  TntimaBidr!,!<hat  wefevivethePa- 
pifts  firft  and  fccond  Juftification  ;  and  be  that'willDe- 
lieve  him,  may  take  bis  courfc  forine  :  i  crave  only'  Iibtrcy  fot 
my  felf  to  believe  that  it  is  not  all  one  to  have  Jurtification  be* 
gun  and  continued ;  and  that  Juftificarion  by  the  fentence  of  tire 
Judge,  is  not  of  the  fame  kind  with  Juftification  Legal  by  the 
Donation  of  the  Gofpel.  If  I  may  not  have  this  Reverend 
Brothers  leave  to  believe  thefe  matters,  I  will  believe  them 
without  his  leave.  And  that  the  Papifts  have  fuch  friends  among 
us,as  thofe  that  make  the  world  believe  that  fuch  things  as  thefe 
are  Popery,  I  will  alfo  lament,  though  fuch  Difputers  give  not 
their  conf<?nt. 

His  Endeavours  to  overthrow  that  Dodrine  of  mine  which 
he  naraethof  [  fecoMel  f uflifi cation  \hsgm pag,  223,  where  he 
argueth,  i.  from  Rom.^.  1.2,3.  That  the  beginning am^  end  ii 
afcnbed  to  faith.  Anfwer.  Its  ail  granted:  faith  is  it  that  we 
are  juftified  by  to  the  laft.  We  are  agreed  of  this  inclulively  ; 
But  the  Queftion  is,  whats  the  Exclufion  :  Not  believing  tn 
Chriji  AS  Lord^nd  Majitr^  nor  loving  him  ^  but  the  works  that 
make  or  are  fuppofed  to  make  that  Reward  to  be  of  debt,  and 
not  of  Grace. 

His  fecond  proof  ib-from  Thil.  3.7,8.  To  which  !  anfwer. 
We  arc  of  FahIs  mind,  but  not  of  yours,     i.  Recounted  all 


( iSy  > 


a$  lofs  apd  dung,  f^t  ftood  in  oppofition  to,  oncprnpL'titfon 
with  Chrid :  and  To  would  I  do  by  faith  and  love  it  fclf/fliould 
they  be  fo  artoganc  2.  Paul exprefly  naracth  the  works  that 
he  exdudcch,  that  is,  the  Righteoufnefs  r»h!ch  u  cf  the  Lav^  or 
in  Legal^orkj-  A^^  do  we  mdiie  any  doubt  of  this  ?  No,nor 
of  thofe  works  that  materially  are  Evangelical  :  for  if  they 
arc  formally  Evangelical,  they  canno:  be  fee  up  againft  Chrift, 
their  very  nature  being  to  fubfervc  him. 

Once  for  all,  remember  this  Argument.  Thofe  works  that 
are  commanded  by  God  in  the  GofpeK  are  not  excluded  by 
God  in  the  Gofpel  in  that  nature  and  to  the  ufe  fo:  which  they 
arc  commanded.  But  faith  in  Chrift  Jefus  the  Lord  and  Sa- 
viour, (  an  entire  faith  )  ajid  Repentance  towards  Gc^  and 
love  to  him  are  commmded'  by  God  in  the  Gofpel  in  crder  to 
the  pardon  of  fin  ;  and  the  continuance  of  tbcfc  with  fincere 
Obedience,  are  coraKitinded  as  rwr^^/of  our  continued  par- 
don, and  as  a  means  of  our  final  Juftfication  at  judgement. 
Therefore  none  of  chefe  are  excluded  by  the  Gofpel  from  any 
of  thefe  ufes  or  ends. 

He  citeih  alfo,  Aii,  1 5.  and  Heb.  2.9.  and  Rom.  i .  1 7.  to  as 
rauchpurpofeasthe  reft. 

Tag.  228.  He  begins  his  Arguments,  The  firft  is  [  Becaufe 
in  VAi»  Art  additions  of  nHmberSy^ithout  wbich  any  thing  may  be 
done  '.  Bnt  ^X'ithout  addition  of  Wsrkj  the  kSl  of  j^fttfpng  it 
jitrftB,  Srgo.']  Anfwer.  i.  As  if  the  Queftionwereof  the 
[A61  ofju/iifyiMg,']aLnd  not  of  Juftification  pafiivcly  taken.Gods 
aft  hath  no  imperfedion  ,  when  yet  it  makcth  not  a  perfeft 
work.  2.  Itsbucfpleen  and  partiality  to  harp  upon  the  term 
f^tvorks']  ftillto  feduceyour  Readers  to  believe  that  1 2m  for 
fuch  works  as  P4«/denycth.I  ufe  not  the  pbrafe  oilfttflification 
by  wo  rk^s  ]  nor  think  it  fit  to  be  ufed,un!cfs  rarely,  or  to  explain 
fuch  texts  of  Scripture  as  do  ufe  it,or  terrostquipollent.s.Jufti' 
fication  is  neither  perfed  nor  real,  without  a  faith  in  Chri!\  as 
Head  and  Husband,  and  Lord, and  Teacher ,  and  Interceffor, 
as  well  as  a  Sacrifice  for  fin.  Nor  is  it  perfect  or  true,  without 
repenting  and  loving  Chrift.  4.  Juftification  is  fo  far  perfed 
atfirft.asthatnofinpaftor  exiftent  is  unpardoned,  "^ucitis 
not  fo  perfed,  but  that,  i.  Many  future  finsmuft  haverr- 

newed 


(288) 


newed  pardon.  2.  And  means  is  to  be  ufed  by  us,  (  believing 
again  at  Icaft  )  for  that  end.  ?.  And  the  continuance  of  par- 
don IS  given  us  but  conditionally,  (  though  we  (hall  ccrtamiy 
perform  the  condition,  )  4.  And  themoft  perfed  fort  ofju- 
ftification  ^by  fentencc  at  Judgement  J  is  ftill  behind.  Arc 
thefe  things  doubtfull  among  Divinesor  Chriftians  ?  That  the 
Church  muft  be  thus  molefted  by  fuch  difputing  volumes  againft 
ir,  to  make  the  Papifts  and  other  enemies  believe  we  hold  L 
know  not  what  ?  Read  the  many  Arguments  of  learned  Said- 
ford  and  Packer  de  "D tfier^fu ^;ind  Bp.  V/her  de  Defcenft*  (  to  tht 
Jefhite  )  by  which  they  prove  that  all  feparated  fouls,  as  fepa- 
, raced.,  are  under  penalty ,and  that  Chrifts  foul  as  feperated  was 
fo  :  and  then  tell  us  whether  your  fancy  of  abfoiutely  perfedl 
Juftification  at  thefirft  will  hold  or  not.  I  wonder  that'men 
fhould  fo  little  know  the  difference  betwixt  Earth  and  Heaven ; 
a.finner  in  fiefli,and  a  Saint  that  is  equal  to  the  Angels  of  God  ? 
and  Qiould  dream  offuch  perfedion  fliort  of  heaven  ,  the 
place  of  our  perfedion  ? 

His  fecond  Argument  is,£  Faith  and  worh  are  here  contrary  : 
If  of  Faith  ^then  not  of  vi>or\s  ]  Anfwer.  Its  true  of  the  works 
that  Paul  excludes :  but  not  of  the  works  that  you  exclude  : 
For  Faith  in  Chrifi  is  [  tVorkj  ]  with  fuch  as  you,  fave  only 
thataA  thatrcfteth  on  hisfatistadionfor  rightcoufnefs :  And 
.repentance  and  love  to  Chrift,  and  denying  our  own  righteouf- 
nefsare  workj  with  you.  And  all  thefe  are  neceflaiily  fubfervient 
toChrift  and  Grace,  and  therefore  not  contrary.  Aff^uJ}int,9nd 
after  him  the  School-  men,  put  it  into  their  moft  common  de- 
finition of  Grace,thac  its  a  thing  [  ^ua  nemo  male  utitur.  ]  And 
as  toefficiency  its  certainly  true:  Grace  doth  not  do  any  harm  : 
And  if  I  may  prefumetotell  Angupinet\i2X[j)bjeElivil)~\  Grace 
may  be  ill  ufed.yet  perhaps  he  mightreply,[not  cjHatatu;^ithout 
contradiBion'yin  good  fadneff,Is  it  not  a  ftrangc  thing  for  a  man 
in  his  wits,  to  exped  to  be  juftified  in  co-ordination  with  Chrifts 
nierirs,  by  denying  that  he  hath  any  merits  of  his  own  that  can 
fo  juftifle  iiim,  and  by  repenting  of  thofe  fins  that  have  con- 
demned him,  and  by  defiring,  loving,  hoping  in  Chrift  alone 
for  his  Juftification  :  orby  Thankfulnefsto  Godfor  juflifying 
l)im  by  the  fole  merits  of  Chrift  ?    And  is  it  not  a  ftrangc  Expo- 

iicioQ 


C  2-8p ) 


fition  that  feigneth  P^t4l  Co  mean  and  exclude  fijch  ads  as 
thcfc  under  the  name  of  works.  But  yet  really  if  fucli  a  man 
be  to  be  found,  that  doth  chink  to  meri'  Juftificacionby  de- 
nying fuch  merit,!  am  againft  him  as  well  as  you. 

His  third  Argument  is,|^  {ffAlthy-tftifie  only  js  the  hrginrtirg 
of  otiV  J ujitp cation,  then  there  /tre  dtgrees  of  'jufiifiration  :  hut 
there  are  no  degrees.  Ergo.  ~\  f^-1rf\ieer.  i.  Faith  is  nei- 
ther the  Beginning  nor  End  of  Juftification  ,  but  a  means 
of  it.  2.  If  you  would  infinuatc  that  1  deny  faith  to  be  the 
means  of  our  continued,  as  well  as  begun  Juftification,  yoii 
deal  deceitfully.  5.  I  deny  your  Confcquence.  \t  may 
prove  more  neceff^ry  to  the  Continuance  oi  our  Juftificarion, 
thbn  to  its  beginning,  and  yet  prove  no  degrees.  4.  But  how 
Juftificuionhath  or  hath  not  Degrees,!  have  told  you  beforf, 
and  ful'er  in  other  writings. 

His  fourth  Af^gument  is,  f  BecAufe good ^orkjiio  not  precede^ 
IfHt  follow  J^ffi^cAnen.']  Anfwer.  i.  Repentance,  and  the 
"love  of  God  in  Chrift,  aud  faith  in  Chrift  as  Lord. and  Vli^id^ 
and  Teacher,  tIo  po  before  the  pardon  of  fin^  and  fo  before 
Jjftification..  2.  External  obedience  goeth  before  Juftlhca- 
cion  at  Judgement. and  Juftificacion  a:  continued  here.  Did  you 
doubt  of  thele? 

'' .  His  fifth  Argument  is,  that  [  Thefe  t^o  J»ufficauoni  over- 
thratv  each  other  :  If  bjf  one  ive  have  peace  with  Go4^  tvh.it  nfed. 
the  othifrf  Howctn ^oodw^rkj  perfe^} our  'Jnffificano»^  ifeing 
themfelvet  imperfe^  ?  ]  Anfwer,  A  jj  (his  is  anfwered  in  th'e 
fecond  Difputation.  i.  Its  no  contradiction  to  be  juftified 
by  God,  by  Chrift,  by  Faith,  by  Words,  by  Works,  if  God 
be  to  be  believed,  that  affi  meth  all.  2.  As  imperfed  fatth 
may  be  the  condition  of  pardon,  fo  may  imperfect  Rcpen. 
tance,  and  inrperfcct  Obedience  of  our  fenrentia'l  Abfoto* 
ton, 

Pag.  23,3.  He  snfwcreth  the  Ol^'ectioni  £  Bhlftdnefs  « 
fifcribtdto  other  Graces  1'^  thus  \  Not  Af^fHippineft  were  i>t 
them  per  iz,  h^rnnlj  as  they  are  fiins.  ]  Anfwer.  Fr^tJiJfig 
Is  more  zhfnt^firikng:  It?  a  great  advamrage  foryou  co 
hsve  the  forming  of  your  OMcctions.  2,  Happinefs  perfc  is 
as  much  in  Love,  as  in  Faith,  and  more.    3.   Oih<r  Graces 

Pp  ace 


(ipo) 


are  wetih^  means,  which  is  more  then  only  works. 

Pig.  241 .  He  proves  that  works  juftifie  not  fubordinate  to 
Faith  2  ^^^'  L  Argument  i.  No  good  workj  ^eri  found  till 
faith  had  done  its  "^orks  J  Anfwer.  i.  Faith  hath  not  done 
its  work  till  death;  we  are  not  juftifiedonly  by  the  firft  ad 
of  faith  :  but  by  afccr-ads  to  the  Dsach.  2.  Faith  in 
Chrift  as  Head, and  Lord,  and  Teacher,  and  Dcfire  and  Re- 
pentance were  found  bctore  Faith  had  juftified  us.  3.  O- 
bcdience  is  found  before  the  fentential  Juftification,  or  the 
continuation  of  our  firft  received  Righteoufnefs. 

His  fecond  Argument  is,  [  Becaufegood  workj  are  the  ejfe^h 
of  Faith  and  f  unification^  and  therefore  cannot  he  the  caufe.  ] 
Anfwer  i.They  arenoneof  thecaufcatall.  Its  not  well  to 
intimate  that  we  hold  them  the  caufe,  as  in  defpight  of  all  our 
owndenyalt.  2.  They  are  not  fo  much  as  Means  or  Antece- 
dents of  that  part  of  Juftification,  of  which  they  are  the  ef- 
fcd.  The  act  of  faith  which  von  will  exercifc  before  your 
death,  is  as  true  a  condition  (  or  Inftrumcnr,if  you  will  needs 
call  it  fo  )  of  your  Juftification  as  continued,  as  your  firft 
act  of  faith  was  of  your  j  uftification  as  begun.  A  nd  yet  that 
act  of  faith  is  but  the  fruit  of  your  firft  Juftification,  as  well  at 
Obedience  is. 

His  third  Argument  is,  that  [  7/  Go/pti  Obedience,  and  good 
works  do  fHbordinately  ail  with  faith  to  the  effetling  of  JuJIifl' 
cation^  then  the  fu/liji cation  which  proceedethfrom  both,  muji 
biof  adiferentkinAandnnture.'^  Anfwer  I.  Neither  faith 
nor  works  effect  Juftification.  2.  Juftification  by  Promife 
and  Gift,  and  Juftification  by  Senrcnce ,  Plea,  &c.  are 
much  different.  3.  But  your  confequence  is  nothing  worth. 
For  thcfe  are  not  caufes.but  conditions.  And  if  they  were,yct 
different  caufes  may  concur  to  the  fame  effect,  which  never 
man  before  you  denyed,  that  T  know  of.  Our  cafe  is,  as  if 
to  a  Rebellthat  hath  forfeited  Life  and  Eftatc,the King  (up- 
on a  Ranfom  j  grant  him  both,  on  condition  that  he  thank- 
fully accept  them  as  the  fruits  of  that  gifcand  Raofom,  and 
to  hold  them  on  condition,  that  he  often  do  his  Homage  to 
the  King,  and  return  not  to  Rebellion.  Doth  the  firft  ac- 
ceptance here  ferve  turn  for  continuance  of  what  is  firft  rc- 

^  ceived, 


C^pM 


celvcd^uithouC  the  following  Homage  and  Fidtlicy  ?  or  do  the 
different  parts  of  the  condirion  make  fuch  a  difference  in  the 
benefit,  as  you  here  take  the  [  Monflrous  f  unification  ]  to  be 
C  as  you  rafhly  call  it  ? ) 

Another  Argument  is,  [  If  faith  be  atotal  caufi  or  condi- 
tion of  fro^Hclng  the  iffeii  of  Jftjiification ,  then  there's  no 
want  of  obedtence  for  its  a/Jljlance.  ]  Anfwer  i.  Faith  or 
obedience  are  no caufes  of  pardon.  2,  I  will  not  trouble  the 
Reader  to  open  the  Ihame  of  that  Philofophy  which  you  make 
fuch  oUcntation  of.  Only  I  would  remember  you,  that  caufes 
lois\  in  ftto genere ^  may  have  Others  under  them.  And  that 
it  followeth  not,  that  the  fun  (hincthnot,  or  the  fire  heateth 
not,  or  that  you  underftand  not,  and  wrote  not  thefe  words, 
though  I  fuppofe  you  will  fay  that  God  is  Caufa  totui;*-  of  all 
thefe  acts :  nor  yet  that  God  doth  ufe  his  creatures  bccaufe 
of  an  infufficiency  in  himfelf.  3.  Faith  taken  for  our  Q^f- 
coming  Believers,  Difciples,  Chrifiians~]  is  the  total  condition 
of  our  firft  Receiving  Juftification.  2.  Faith  taken  more  nar- 
rowly for  our  accepting  Chrifts  Rightcoufncfs,  is  not  the  total 
Condition  of  our  firft  Receiving  of  Juftificat.on.  3.  Obe- 
dience is  part  of  the  condition  of  the  continuance  of  it,and 
of  our  fentcntial  Juftification.  And  whereas  you  talk  over 
&nd  over  of  [_Total  cafifes, find  particular  CAufe'.  ]]  I  tell  you 
again  they  are  no  caufes. 

He  adds  that  then  []  Obedience  doth  nihil  agcrc,  or  actum 
agcre.  ]  Anfwer.  ]tdothra'i:ilejficere.  But  befid5«,f  «ji[;;7 ] 
and  Q/<j^«w  ^there's  twothings  ofc  mertioned  ,  Juftifica- 
tion at  Judgement,  and  the  non-amiflion  of  it  here. 

3-  He  infipidly  again  difputes  that  l  Jf  an  tffeB  doth  totdl) 
freceedfroru  any  caufe,  then  it  totally  depends  on  it.  ]]  And  what 
then  ?  Therefore  ic  folelv'  dependeth  on  it  .-  And  if  thefe 
things  were  true,  what  are  they  to  our  queftion  ?  But  faith  he, 
[  fVhen  good  rvorl^tfihe  fruit  of  faith  are  interrupted  ,  yet  cHr 
fufiif  cation  tibidfs  bji  the  Jingle  ia^ttence  of  ft!  h  only  as  a  total 
caufe  of  its  beingand  confervition.  ^  \rS\Scr.  I.  Alas/  What 
would  fuch  Dilputants  do  with  the  Church,  if  Gods  mercy 
did  not  hinder  them  I  By  your  own  Argument  now,  neither 
God.nor  Chrift,  nor  the  Gofpel  are  any  caufes  of  our  Juftifi- 

Pp  a  cation. 


(ipz) 


cation.  For  you  fjy  Fsith  is  a  TotAlcAnfe^  and  there  can  be 
buc  one  Tof <«/ C*»«»/^,  unlcfs  you  lofc  the  honor  of  your  Phi- 
lofophy.  2.  Faith  is  no  proper  caufe  at  all.  ^  Did  you 
not  fee  what  rnuft  needs  be  ar.fwercd  you.  That  Faith  is  in- 
terrupted as  well  as  Obediencc^and  yet  no  iniercifion  of  our 
Jufti^icati on.  When  we  fleep  we  do  not'  at  leaft  alway)act  faith 
no  more  then  obedience  ftf  fo  much,  j  And  tl;e  habit  of  both 
continucth  together  fleeping  and  waking  :  And  if  you  (hould 
give  over  love  and  fincerity  of  obedience,  you  would  ccafeto 
be  juftified. 

His  Uft  Argumenc  is,  [  ^ecanfeforfittt  after  Convtrfion^  ^e 
mufi  hivertcourfe  only  hjfuiih  toChrift-,  tn  our  Advocate.  ] 
Anfwer.     i.  That  fpeaks  only  of  renewed  pardon  for  parti- 
cular fin5>  but  not  of  our  Juftification  at  Judg€n:ient,  nor  the 
non-omifliion  here.     2.  We  muft  have  recourfe  toChrift  with 
Repentance,  andcfteem,  and  felf-denial,  and  defire,  &c.^% 
well  as  that  aft  of  faith  which  you  plead  for,  as  the  total  caufe. 
And  when  you  would  fetZ^-^c^jf  againftZ^wc/;^,  you  do  but 
mif-underftandhim.     He  faith  truly  with  Paul^ihii  neither 
in  whole  or  part  are  our  own  works  (  fuch  as  Paul  fpeaks  of^ 
our  Righteoufnefs,  that  is,  to  anfwer  the  Law  as  Paul  menti- 
onethjOr  any  way  to  merit  or  fatlsfi€,  or  Hand  in  co-ordina- 
tion with  Chrift.  But  Zinchj  never  thought  that  Repentance 
and  Faith  in  Chrift  as  Head, and  Lord,  and  Defire,  and  Gra- 
titude, &c.  might  be  no  means  or  Conditions  of  any  fort 
of  Juftification,  or  of  that  which  we  alTert  them  to  be  means 
of. 

•  I  would  anfwer  much  more  of  this  Difputation  ;  but  I  am 
perfwaded  the  j  idicious  Reader  will  think  I  have  dons  hira 
wrong, in  troubling  him  with  this  murh.  See  fAg,  298,  J99. 
how  he  anfwereth  the  Objed;on,  that  pirdon  is  promifcd  to 
Repentance,  &c.  I  will  not  difpa^agc  the  Readers  undtr- 
ftanding  fo  much  as  to  offer  him  a  Confutation  of  that,  and 
much  more  of  the  Book.  Only  his  many  Arguments  on  the 
Queftion  of  my  firft  Difputation,  I  muft  crave  your  Pati- 
ence, while  I  examine  briefly,  and  I  will  tire  you  with  no 
wore. 


lMt*  W.  ^41/.  411,412.  /  ^.7/  taUj  up  my  yirguments 
Againji  the  for  ej aid  Defnition  of  Faith  to  be  an  accepiittg  ofCkrift 
«i  Lord  ani  Saviour  ;  proving  th^^t  ChriJ}  only  oi  Saviour  a»4 
friefi,  offering  hiiifetftip  to  the  dei&th  of  the  Crofsfor  onr ftnf^  is 
tht  propir  ObjeSi  ofjuflifjing  faith^  as  jnfiifyiftg-  Argument 
1. If  the  Faith  of  the  Fathers  n»dtr  the  old  Ttpament  \>rai  direU" 
fd  to  (fhrtft  us  dji»}g  Priefl  and  Saviohy  ;  then  alfo  the 
Faith  ofBeliiVers  now  ottghtfo  to  be  direfteJ.'Sut. — Ergc,  — - 

jlnfjv.    I.  Igrantthe  wJiole,  and  never  made  queftion  of 
But  what  kin  is  tlieconclnfion  of  this  Argumenc  to  chat 

been  added. 


Chriftasdyingor 
cannot. 

Mr.  W.  Argument  i.  If  Chrijl  at  dyings  and  as  Saviour 
Ja  fatiife  CJods  Jufiice^  an  J  paci^e  a  ftnners  confctenee^  then 
ms  djing  and  Saviour  he  « the  Objtfi  of  jitjiif/i^g  Faith.  Bui 
Ergo. 

jiftfvr.  The  fame  anfwer  ferveth  to  thisas  to  the  laft.    The 
condufion  is  granted,  but  nothing  to  the  Queftion,  uniefs 
[Ow/7  ]  hadbeen  in.     2.    Cbrift  as  obeying  actively  ,   an4 
Chriii  as  Rifing,  and  as  interceding  ,  and  as  judging,  as  King, 
doth  alfo  juftifieus,  Rom. ^.19.  /iow.4  24,25.  ^c'w  o.3  3»?4. 
A/at.12.-;';.  and25. 34,40.  Pcrufe  thefe  Texts  impartially, 
and  be  ignorant  of  this  if  you  can.  3 .  And  yet  the  Arguraenl 
will  not  hold,  that  no  att  of  t  lith  is  the  condition  of  juiiifica- 
tion,  but  thofe  whofe  object  isconfidered  only  asjuftifying. 
The  accepting  of  Chr  ift  to  fanctifie  us,is  a  real  pare  of  the  con- 
dition of  Juftification. 

Pp3  Mr, 


] 


(iP4) 


L^r.  W-  Argument  3.  IfChrifl  as  Lord  hi  proper/f 
theObjeH  of  fe^r,  thenhe  u*  not  frofertj  the  Oi?je6l  of  Faith  as 
jujiifjin^  :  But f^^^- 

yinfvf.   I .    I  f  [  Property  ]  be  fpokcn  de  propria  quart  ompdo^ 
thenisChrift  properly  the  Objed  of  neither,  that  is,  he  is 
not  the  objcd  of  either  of  thefe  Oi^lj-     2.  But  if  [  fro- 
pirlj  ]  be  oppofed  to  a  tropical,  analogical,   or  any  fuch  im- 
proper fpeecb,    then  he  is  the  Objcd  as  Lord,  both  of  fear, 
and  faith,  and  obedience,   ^c.  3.  The  deceit  that  ftili  mif- 
leads  moft  men  in  this  point, is  in  the  terms  of  reduplication, 
{faith  as  jtt(iifj/i»g^  "|  which  men  that  look  not  through  the 
bark,  do  fwallow  without  fufficicnt  chewing,  and  fo  wrong 
themfelves  and  others  by  meer  words.     Once  more  therefore 
underftand,  that  when  men  diftinguifh  berwcen^^ri  <]ua  jufii" 
ficans^  and  ejtta  jufttfcans,  and  fay,   [   Faith  which  jufitfieth, 
MCifteth  Chrift  at  Headand  Lord  ;  but  faith  asjufitfjing,taketh 
kirn  only  as  a  "Triefl,  ~]  The  very  diftindion  in  the  later  branch 
of  it,  [_i^uajiifiificans.  J  Is  1 .  Either  palpable  falfeDodrine. 
2.    And  a  meer  begging  of  the  Queftion      3.  Or  clfeco- inci- 
dent with  the  other  branch,  and  fo  contradidory  to  their  af- 
fertion.     For    1.  The  common  Intent  and  meaning  is,  that 
\_Fi^es  tfuacrtdit  inCkrtfiumjHJiificat  :  And  fo  they  fuppofe 
ihat  Faith  is  to  be  denominated  formally  [jufificanf^ai;  objf[lo 
tjua  object  fivj :  And  if  this  be  true,  thcDfi^^es  qua  fides  jujhfi- 
cat:  For  the  ob;ed  is  effentiai  to  faith  injptcie.  And  fo  in  their 
fenfe,[/2</fj  ^«<<;A(y?;^r<i«j  ]  is  but  the  implication  of  this  falfc 
Dodrine,   that  hac fides  in  Chriftttm  crnci^xtim  tjua  tc/u  ;;//?»- 
feat.    Which  I  never  yet  met  with  fobcr  Divine  that  would 
own  when  he  faw  it  opened.     For  the  nature  and  cflsrce  of 
faith,  is  but  its  aptitude  to  the  office  of  juftifying,  and  it  is  the 
Covenantor  free  Gift  of  God /«  wodo  prcmittendi,  that  af- 
figneth  ic  its  office.     The  nature  of  faith  is  but  the  DUpofiiia 
mattrtA  ;  but  irs  neareft  interefi  in  the  effeft  is  as  a  condition 
of  the  Promifc  performed.  2.  Lut  if  by  the  Q  qua  jnfiificans'^ 
any  (hould  intend  no  more  then  to  define  the  nature  mate- 
rially of  that  faith  which  is  the  condition  of  Juflificacion,  then 

the 


the  (}U4  and  the  iju<t  is  all  one  :  and  then  they  contradict  their 
own K{{txi\0Vy^\i2il[fidts  efukjtifiific Arts  non  rccipit  ChriftHtn 
ntT)ominum.  ]  3.  If  the  [  ^«^3  (hould  relate  to  the  effecc, 
then  it  would  only  cxprefs  a  dilUnction  between  fuftificanoH 
and  other  Be»eftf,  and   not  between  faith  and  faith.     For 
th€n\^»a jujiijfcans]  fliould  becontradiftinft  only  from  [^ua 
faf}3ificaKs2  ^^  ^^^  like.     And  if  fo,  it  is  one  and  the  fame 
Faith  and  the  fame  acts  oF  faith,  that  fanctiHc  and  juftifie. 
"  As  if  a  King  put  into  a  gracious  acr,to  a  company  of  RebeU, 
chat  they  (hail  be  pardoned>  honoured,  enriched,  and  all  upon 
conditionof  their  thankfull  acceprancc of  him,»nd  of  this  act 
of  Grace:Hcre  th^rc  is  no  room  to  diftinguifh  of  their  Accep- 
tance, as  if  the  acceptance  of  pardon  were  the  condition  of 
pardon,  and  the  acceptance  of  riches  were  the  conditionof 
jhcir  Riches,  cT'-'.  But  it  is  the  fame  acceptance  of  their  Prince 
and  his  Act  of  Grace,  that  hath  relation  to  the  feveral  confc- 
qjent  benefits,  &  may  be  called  pardoning,honouring&enr!ch- 
ing'iti  fevcralrefpects.  It  is  the  famemarnage  ofa  Prince  that 
■XCTakes  a  woman  rich,  honourable,  c^c.  So  it  is  the  fame  faith 
in  whole  (-hrift,asChrift,  that  is  fanctifyingandjuftifying.as 
j[t  relatcth  to  the  feveral  Benefits:  that  is,  it  is  the  condition 
of  both,  fo  that  the'ir[<jua  j»y?/^'-4»;j]doch  either  intimate  this 
untruth,  that  fj^c  fidts  ^«<c  talis  ,  id  t^,  (jm  fides  in  Chriflum 
crucifixum  jfi^ificat  "2  (  which  is  true  ,  neither  of  one  act,nor 
other, )  and  fo  begs  the  Queflion,  or  elfe  it  faith  nothing.    So 
that  I  (hall  never  admit  this  (}u<e  jttfitficans^  without  an  Ex. 
pofition  J  and  better  then  yet  I  have  fecn  from  any  that  ufe 
it. 

Mr.  W.  A>gumtnt  4.  Th^t  vhich  is  thefn/n  and  fuhjlayjct  of 
SvMgtlkal  preaching  ,  it  the  chjt^  of  Ihf^tfjing  Faith.  'But 
Chriji  as  crncifitdy  is  the  fubjiance  of  Evangelical  preAchiftg* 
Ergo. 

3^1  y^nfvf.  I .  When  I  come  to  look  for  the  condufion  which 
excluded  Chrift  as  Lord,  Teacher,  ^c.  from  being  the  ob- 
ject, I  can  find  no  fuch  thing  in  any  Argument  thct  yet  I  fee. 
They  have  the  fame  face  as  Mr.  BUket  Arguments  had, to  con- 

"  _  elude 


(2-9.6) 

dude  no  more  then  what  I  g.  an,  th  AC  is,  that  Chrift  as  cru- 
cified, is  the '^bjecc  or  jj"iiurig  faith.  ;'utwhercscb- [[OwZ/j] 
or  any  exclufive  1  f  che  tcft.  2.  Buc  ificbeimplyed.thei  i.  I 
fay  ot  the  term  crucified,  that  Chtilt  crucified  to  purchafc 
fanctificaticn  and  falvation,  is  the  object  of  that  faith  which 
is  the  condition  of  Juiiificatton,  and  not  only  Chrift  crucified 
to  procure  JuHification.     i.  1  deny  the  Minor,  if  by  [^(\im  and 
fubftance]  you  exclude  Chriftas  Lord,  Teachtr,  Judge,  Head| 
CJ-f.  Surely  Evangelical  preaching  containcth  Chrifts  Refar- 
rection,  Lord-(hip,  Intercefiion,  ^c.  as  well  as  his  death,or 
elfe  the  Apoftles  preached  not  rhe  Gofpel.  1  his  needs  no  proof 
with  them  that  have  read  the  Bible.' 

Mr.'W.Argtim.'^.That  ^hich  we  Pjould dejire  to  k*t9n>  ahovt 
^llthwgs^is  the  Ohje-^  ofjvjiifjingfaith  :  But  that  is  Chrlji  crw^ 

(ifed.      -Br go.  ^'^    ' 

An[vc.iS\\\\  the  Queftion wanting  in  the  conciufion  :  Who 
denyeth  that  Chrift  crucified  is  the  object  of  juftifying  faith  ? 
2. But  if  [p«/;'3^^^C'^^"nderftood, really  doth  not  this  Brother 
defire  to  know  Chrift  obeying,Chrift  rjfenjChrift  teaching,ru- 
ling,  interceding, (^c?  I  do. 

Mr,\t^t  Argument  6.  ThAt  in  Chriji  ii  the  ob'^eB  ef  faith ^ 
Asjtiftifjirg.vuhichheirigafprehen^eddothjufltfiens  :  Bftt  the 
dfiUbJiiffering^  bloodtobedienc^ofChrifi  to  de^th  is  thxti'  -"  - 
Therefore  it  u  the  proper  obje£l  of  faith  ^  as  jftflifj  ing. 

Anf^,  I.  I  diftipgu'fh  of  the  term  \  <«  )tt^if)ir^^  ]  and  an- 
Iwer  as  before.  No  aft  of  Faith  cffedeth  our  Juftification  .♦ 
and  whole  faith  is  the  condition :  1  he  being  or  Nature  of  no 
ad  is  rhe  formal  or  nrareft  reafonof  faiths  Tntereft  in  Juftifi- 
cation It  juftifieth  not[[<»/  thiiAEi^nor  as  that  ^^  2.  If[^o«/j»]]oC 
fome  exclufive  be  not  implyed  in  the  conciufion,!  grant  it  ftill.* 
Bjirif  It  be,  then  both  Major  and  Minor  are  faHe.  i.  The 
Major  is  falfe  ,  for  it  is  not  only  the  matter  of  our  Jttni#- 
cation,  that  is  the  objtd  of  juftifying  faith.  To  affirm  this» 
i$bntto  beg  the  qirettien;  weexped  yoor  proof.  2  The 
'^  Minor 


•^   097)    . 

Minor  is  falfe  :  for  befides  the  fuffenngs  ircntioned,  the  very- 
perfon  of  Chrift,  and  the  adivc  obedience  of  Chri  i,  and  the 
Title  to  pardon  given  us  in  the  Gofpe),  &c.  apprehended  by 
fai[h  do  juftifie.  But  the  queftion  is  not  what  juftitieth  ex  parte 
Chrijiiy  but  ex  parte  nojiri. 

Air.  W.  Argument  7.  That  tvlkh  the  (h^el  dothfirjlpre- 
fentpu  ypith^  u  the  Ohje^  of  faith  Oi  j'*fiif)i»g  •  'But  Chrifi  :i 
in  the  Goffetfi'^Ji  frefented  m  a  Saviour  :  therefort  he  is  tbtrein 
theohjeH  of  faith  iU  ju^  if)  i  *Jg- 

J'fip.  I.  Diftinguifhlng  as  before  of  the  |[.*/  'j^f^^fyi»g2 
I  ftiU  grant  the  whole  j  the  cxclufive  and  fo  the  queftion  is  (till 
vvanc.ng  in  the  conclufion.    2.  but  if  he  mean  only^  then  both 
Maior  an  J  CMi»or  are  falfe.  The  MJor  is  falfc;for  that  which 
the  Gofpel  doth  firft  prefenc  m  with,  is  but  fart  of  the  objed 
of  juftifj'ing  Faith.  For  it  prefenteth  us  with  the  Articles  to 
which  W2  mult  AfTent,.  and  to  the  CJood  which  we  muft  Ac- 
cept by  degrees ,  andilotall  inafentenceor  word.    TheJ/*- 
wo;- is  falfe,  beciufe  in  order  of  nature  ,   the  Defcription  of 
Chrifts  Perfon  goeth  firft,  and  of  his  Office  afterward.    3 .  The 
word  S^viofir^  comprehendcth  both   his  Prophetical  and 
Kingly  Office,  by  which  he  faveth  us  from  fin  and  Hell  j  as  al- 
fohisllefurredion,  Afcention,  Interccfiion,  c^c.  And  in  this 
large  fcnfe  I  eafily  grant  the  Conclufion.     4.  If  by  a  Savi-^ 
oar^  he  mean  only  (  as  his  caufe  importeth  )  a  facrificc  for-fin, 
then  (as  this  is  a  ftrangely  limited  lenfe  of  the  word  Saviour^ 
fo  )  certainly  the  Incarnation,  Bapcifra,  Temptation,  Miracles, 
Obedience  of  Chrid  are  all  exprett  before  this ;  And  if  it  were 
oiherwife,  vettheconfequenceofthe  .ifaior  is  utterly  ground- 
lefsand  vsin.Pnoricy  or  Pofterioricy  of  any  point  delivered  in 
the  Gofpel,  is  a  poor  Argument  to  prove  it  the  Objed  (  much 
lefs  it  alone  )  of  jufiifying  faith. 

A/r.W.  Arguments.  7  hat  xtkich  the  Lords  Supper  doth  as 
a  feal  prefent  to  ]»fttf)tKg  faith  ,  that «  the  ohje^  of  faith  as 
JKJi'fjliMg  :  But  the  Lor,h  Suppr  doth  frefentm  with  thrift  as 

djir>g, E'^gO. 

Q  q  AnfVi\ 


Anf^A.  Still  the  queflion  is  wanting  in  the  conclufion. 
What  a  pack  of  Arguments  arc  here?  2.  Do  you  believe  in 
your  confcience,  that  Chrift  is  prdented  and  reprefented  in  the 
Supper  only  as  dying  ? 

Mr.W.  Argument  9.  If  ^e  leave  RedtmPtion  and  rem'Jfton 
of  fins  through  faith  in  his  bloody  then  faith  oi  juftifying  pjould 
only  Uok^upon  that  >  But  ^e  have  redemption  and  remtjjion  of 
fins  b]  h>s  bloody  Col.  i . 

Anfvff,  Here'sone  Argument  that  hath  the  queftion  in  the 
conclufion.  But  i .  I  deny  the  confequcnce  of  the  C^ta'jor^ 
as  not  by  Chriftians  to  be  endured.  1  he  [^  onl^  ]  followcth  not . 
Though  we  rauft  be  juftified  by  his  blood,  .1  have  proved  be- 
fore, that  we  are  alfo  juftified  by  his  Refurredion,  Obedience, 
I  nterceffion ,  J  udgementj<^r.  2.  Moreover  the  confequencc 
is  falfe  on  another  account  :  Juflifying  faith ,  that  is,  Faith 
the  condition  of  J  uftification  ,  muft  look  at  more  in  Chrift, 
then  that  which  purchafeth  Redemption.  It  juftifieth  not  effi- 
ciently, nor  of  its  own  nature,  but  the  Promifc  juftifieth  with- 
out faiths  co-efficiency ;  only  it  makes  the  condition  fine  cjua 
noH:  and  this  it  may  do  by  another  Ad  of  faith,  as  well  as 
that  which  apprehendeththeRanfom.  5.  The  [^ejuajuflifi^ 
cans^  Ibavefpoketo  :  ^a  cannot  hci-e  properly  refer  to 
the  nature  of  the  faith,  but  to  the  I'cnefit.  And  fo  faith  qua 
jftfijficarjs,  is  neither  this  ad,  nor  that  a6t,  nor  any  ad  j  but 
Iqpia  jufiificans'}  noteth  only  its  refped  to  Juftification  ra- 
ther then  to  Sandification,  or  other  benefits.  As  when  I  kindle 
a  fire,  1  thereby  occafion  both  Light  and  Heat,  by  putting  to 
the  fewel.  And  if  you  fpeak  of  that  ad  of  mine  |  qtia  calefa- 
ciens :  or  (jHAilluminans  ]  this  doth  not  diftinguifh  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  ad,  but  ofthe  Refped  that  the  fame  Ad  hath  to 
feveral  effeds  or  confequcnts. 

(J^r^.  W,  Argument  i  o.  JfChrlfl  only  at  crucified  he  the  Me- 
ritorioHi  C^tffe  of  our  Redemption  and  f  afiification ,  then  Chrijf 
crncifedi-i  the  or,lj  ol^jeH  of  faith  oi  J(*fifjing,  B(tt Ergo. 


Opp) 


Anfvfi.  I.  Theconfcquenceof  the  cHfrtjor  is  vain  and  an 
proved.  More  then  the  Meritorious  Caufeof  our  Redempti- 
on is  the  objed  of  jiilVifying  faith.  2.  The  Miner  is  no  fmali 
errour  in  the  Judgement  of  moft  Proteftants ,  who  maintain 
that  Chrifts  adive  Obedience,  and  fuff^ring  life,  are  alfo  the 
Meritorious  caufe  of  ourjuftification,  and.not  only  his  Cru5-« 
cifixion. 

Mr.  W.  Argument  II.  IfChrifi  m  a  fervant  did  fathfie 
Gods  Jfiflice,  then  he  U  fo  to  be  belisveci  on  to  Jufli^c^tion.  But 
as  a  fervant  he  did  fat U fie  Geds  fffffi:e.— '  Ergo. 

'Anfw.  I.  I  granttheconclufion,  Chrift  as  a  fervant  is  to 
be  believed  in.  2. But  if  [  erjj  ]  «vas  again  forgotten,  I  further 
anfwer.  i.  I  deny  the  confequencc  o^  the  Aif a j or  ^  bccaufe 
Chrift  i?  to  be  believed  on  for  Juftificacion  in  other  refpeds, 
•ven  in  ?M  effcncial  to  his  Office,  and  not  only  as  fatisfying.  I 
inftanced  before  in  Obeying,  Riling,  J^^g'f^g,  from  exprefs 
Scripture.  2.  If  the  conclufion  were  granted,  icsagainft  you 
andnotforyou.  Fori.  Adive  obedience  is  as  proper  to  a 
feryant  as  fuffenng.  2.  Chrift  Taught  the  Church  as  a  fervant 
tohisFather,  sndisexprefly  called  A'J^iinijier  oj  the  Cir- 
cumcifion.  So  that  thefe  you  yield  the  objects  of  this  faitb. 

•  A-Ir.W.  Argument  1 2.  If  none  cAn  call  Ch^ifi  [[Lord]  before 
he  be  juj^ifiedbj  fttth,  then  faith  as  j^^ifj/injr  u  not  an  Ac- 
cepting him  OA  L'^rd,  The  Minor  « true  ,  becaufe  none  can  call 
him  Lcrd^  but  b^  the  Sfirit ;  and  the  Spirit  is  received  by  the 
hearir,(roffith^  after  we  believe, 

■Anfiv.  Any  thing  muft  ferve.  i.  V^oth  Major  ^nd  Minor 
are  fuch  as  are  not  to  be  fwallowed  in  the  lump.  If  by  [CaS^ 
you  mean  the  f*i//of  the  voyce,  then  the  confequence  of  the 
j^^jor  IS  vain  and  grcundlefs.  For  a  man  may  believe  in  Chrift 
with  the  heat  as  Lord  aai  Saviour,  before  htcall  him  fo  with 
the  mouth.  But  if  by  [J/f  ?/i/]  you  m^'\x\\^Believe^  then  the  Mi- 
nor is  falfe,&  fo  confeflcd  by  all  Proceftants  and  Chriftiansthar. 

Q^q  2  ever 


(300) 


ever  I  heard  from  of  this  point,  till  now  :  For  they  all  confefs 
that  faith  in  Chrift  as  Lord  and  Teacher,  and  Head,  o-i:.  is 
the  fides  ^H(t  jufiificat,  or  is  of  neceflity  to  be  prefent  with 
the  believing  in  his  blood,  that  a  man  may  be  juftified.  Ne- 
ver did  I  hear  till  now  that  wc  firft  believe  in  Chrift  as  dying 
only,  and  fo  are  juftified  before  we  believe  in  him  as  Lord> 
.  (  and  it  feems  before  we  are  his  Subjects  or  Difciples,and  that 
is.beforc  weareChriftiansJ  7.  To  your  proof  of  the  yl/i»or 
I  anfwer,  i.  It  is  no  proof  becaufe  the  Text  faith  only  that, 
[[  No  Tffun  can  call  him  Lord  bttt  bj  the  Spirit  ]  but  our  quefti- 
onis  of  Believing  J  and  not  o^  Calling  which  is  C^^fejfiyig. 
2.  Many  Expofitors  take  it  but  for  a  common  gift  of  the  Spi- 
ric  thats  there  fpoken  of  :•  and  do  you  think  juftification 
muft  needs  precede  fuch  common  gifts  ?  3.  But  if  it  had  been 
\_  "Believe  in  ftead  of  Call  ]  its  nothing  for  you  :  For  I  eafily 
grant  that  no  man  can  believe  in  Chrilt  as  Lord  but  by  the  Spi- 
rit :  but  I  deny  that  this  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  never  received,  till 
afrcr  that  we  believe  and  arc  juftified.  And  becaufe  it  feems 
you  judge  that  Believing  in  Chrift  to  Juftification  is  without 
the  Spirir,  I  pray  anfw'cr  firftwhat  we  have  faid  againft  the 
/IrmimiifHy  and  A»g:^fline  againft  the  Pelagians ,  for  the  con- 
trary. Who  would  have  thought  that  you  had  held  fuch  a 
point  ?  4.  How  could  you  wink  fo  hard  as  riot  to  fee  that 
your  Argument  is  as  much  againft  your  felf  as  me  ,  if  you  do 
but  turn  it  thus }  [  //  none  can  call  Chrift  Jefn^^or  the  Saviour^ 
or  believe  in  him  to  ftfftification,  before  he  be  juftified  by  faith^ . 
then  faith  as  j»ftif)ing  is  not  the  accepting  him  as  a  Saviour: 
The  U^linor  is  proved,  becaufe  none  can  call  him  Jefus,  or  be- 
lieve to  Juftification  but  by  the  Spirit]  This  is  as  wife  and 
ftrong  an  Argument  as  the  other,  and  all  one.  Sec  i  lob.  4. 1 5. 
&  5.5.  Believing  in  Chrift  as  Saviour  is  as  much  of  the  Spirir, 
ns  believing  in  him  as  Lord.  5.  The  Text  makes  againft  you 
(  I  ^w^,  I--3.)  For  there  when  Paul  would  denominate  tl>e 
true  Chriftian  faith  or  Confeflion,  hemaieth  Chrift  as  Lord 
the  Object. 

Afr.W.  Argument  15.  If  thepromife  of  Salvation  be  Ike 
proper  ebje^  of  J^ft*fj^^^  faith,  then  not  the  commands  of  Chrift 
£s  Lord  and  Lti^'givtr*  Bftt'j Ergo>  /tnf^ 


CJoO 

w 

tAnf^.  T.  The  concIuHon  is  nothing  to  our  Queftion, which 
is  not  of  CowmdK^;,  but  of  Chrift  as  Lord.  Icmay  be  you 
know  no  difference  between  the  Relation  and  fubfequcnt  Du- 
ties, between  the  Authority  and  the  Command ,  between  fub- 
jedion  and  obedience.  2.  The  .Ww^r  is  falfe,  U  by  proper, 
you  mean  Only  (  and  if  not ,  the  confcquence  is  vain  and 
nullj  For  the  Perfon  of  Chrift,  and  his  Office,  and  the  fruits 
of  his  Office,  even  Pardon,  yea  and  Glory  ,  are  the  true  Ob- 
jcds  of  juftifying  Faith. 

Mr.  W.  Argument  1 4.  Jfwe  are  mt  jnf}ified  both  by  Righ- 
teoufnefs  Inherent  and  Imputed  ^  then  not  by  obeying  Ciarijl  its 
Lord  Hnd  LaXic-giver.   But ^ Ergo. 

Anfw,  Whats  this  to  the  Queftion  ?    i.  About  Juftificati- 
onby  Righceoufnefs  Imputed  or  Inherent  wc  fpoke  .before. 
2.  The  conclufion  never  was  acquainted  with  our  Qjieftioh  ? 
Again  it  fcems  you  cannot  or  will  not  diftingu  fli  between  Re- 
lative fubjedion  and  adual  obedience.    "A-  man  may  become 
your  fervanc  and  fo  have  the  Privilcdges  of  a  fervanr,  by  cove- 
riant^  before  he  obey  you.  A  woman  in  Marriage  may  fubjcft 
herfelftoyou,  and  havelntereft  in  your  eftate  even  by  that 
Marriage  which  promifeth  fubjcftion  as  well  as  LoveCwithouc 
excluding  the  firft  from  being  any  condition  of  her  Intereft;  ) 
and  all  this  before  fhe  obey  you,    3 .  Your  confequence  would 
follow  as  much  againft  your  felf  as  me.  For  Believing  in  Chrift 
as  a  Ranfom,  is  as  truly  a  particular  Inherent  Righteoufncfs,  as 
believing  in  bim  as  Lord.     4.  We  are  juftificd  by  Righteouf- 
ncfs Inherent  as  a  particular  righteoufnefs,  though  not  as  a  U- 
niverfal:  as  fubordinate  to  Chrifts  Righteoufnefs  that  it  may 
be  ours,  though  not  in.co-ordination  with  it. 

Mr.  W.  Argument  15.  If  our  accepting  of  (^hrifl  as  Lord 
and  LaW-givtr  be  not  'properly  or  formally  faith  ,  nor  properly 
to  be  called  obedience^  then  ^e  are  -not  formally  jufiiped  .by  fnth 
in  him  04  Lord,  nor  b]  our  obedience  to  him  as  Lord.  But  fetch  an 
accepting  of  him  is  not  properly  >  or  in  the  account  ofGod^  or  in  it 

aq  -3  M 


(501) 


fc/f  Pitith  or  ohJicKce. 'Ergo. — The  Minor  I  provt:  if  pur' 
j)ofeSyifitenii:KS,or  veri^.jl  jirofejjions  to  helieve  or  obey  are  not 
proper  I  J  faith  or  chedier.ce^  then  fuch  an  accepting  ii  not  faith 
or  chdience.  The  Minor  proved.  That  which  is  or  mxj  hi  found 
in  Hypocrites  or  Reprobates  U  not  true  faith  or  obedience, 
B  H Ergo. 

Anf'ic.  The  Lord  pardon  the  hardnefs  of  my  heart  that 
hath  no  more  companionate  fcnfe  of  the  miferies  of  that  poor 
Church  ,  and  the  diflionourof  God  which  fuch  Difputes  as 
this  proclaim  ;  by  Arguments  as  fie  to  be  anfwered'by  Tears  as 
by  words,  i .  A  little  before  he  was  proving  (  Argument  12) 
that  none  could  call  Chrift  Lord  butby  the  Spirit ,  and  there- 
fore this  ad  was  afcer  Juftification  :  And  now  he  provcth 
that  its  common  to  Hypocrites,  &  Reprobates.  2.  Hsrc  he  de- 
livereth  rae  from  ail  the  trouble  and  fallacy  that  the  diftindion 
o(  fi^es  quA  Juftificat  and  files  qua  Jnfitficat^  hath  been  guilty 
of.  Forif  the  ad  that  wedifpute  about ,  be  no  faith  at  all, 
thenit  isnotthe  j?i^f/^«je.  And  yet  he  often  is  upon  the  Q»^ 
Jfi(iificani  himfelf,  forgetting  thif. 

3.  Had  I  but  delivered  fuch  a  Doctrine  as  this,  what-Hiou^ 
1  have  heard?  Jufiifying  faith  hath  three  Parts,  ASSENT. 
CONSENT,  and  APFIANCE  ,  (  which  alfo  have  fcveral 
ads  or  parts,  according  to  the  divers  elTential  parts  of  the  Ob- 
ject.)  ASSENT  is  but  Initial  and  introductory  to  the  reft, 
as  all  acts  of  the  Intellect  arc  to  thofeof  the  Will.  CON- 
SENT is  the  fame  which  we  here  call  ACCEPTING,  which 
is  but  the  meer  VOLITION  denominated  from  its  refpcct 
to  the  offer  and  thing  offered.  This,  as  it  is  in  tliewill  ,  the 
commanding  Faculty,  fo  is  it  as  it  were  the  Heart  of  Faith  ; 
the  firft  act  being  but  to  lead  in  this,  and  AFFIANCE  the 
third,  being  commanded  much  by  this  ,  or  depending  on 
it  :  For  as  it  is  feated  in  tbeAtfedions,  fofar  itisdiftinct 
from  this  Velle  or  COMSENT.  Now  .when  ever  we  name 
F<j/>^  by  anyone  of  thefe  three  acts  (  as  the  Scripture  doth 
from  every  one )  we  include  tnem  all ,  though  to  avoid  tedi- 
ouTnefs  we  Oand  not  to  name  all  the  parts,  when  ever  by  one 
word  we  exprefs  the  whole.     And  aU  thefe  Acts  have  whole 

Chrift 


Oo3) 

Chrift  in  all  the  e/Tentlals  of  his  Perfon  and  office  for  their  ob- 
ject. Now  that  this  faith  in  Chrift  as  Lord,  or  accepting 
him,  ("hould  be  faid,andthacby  a  Chriftian  Divine,  and  thac 
in  the  Reformed  Church,  to  be  no  faith  at  all,  fto  fay  nothing 
of  his  denying  it  to  be  obedience;  )  is  no  matter  of  honour 
or  comfort  to  us.  How  oft  doth  the  Scripture  esprefly  men- 
tion faith  in  our  Lord  Je(us  Chrift  ?  Receiving  Chrift  Jefus  the 
Loid,Ce/.2.6.  with  other  equipollent  terms.  But  I  will  no: 
offer  to  trouble  any  Chriftian  Reader  with  Arguments  for  fuch 
a  Truth. 

4.  But  5iKt  the  man  would  bethought  to  have  Reafon  for 
what  he  faith;  and  to  his  proof  1  further  anfwer.    f.  P«r- 
pofej^  Inter.tioni^  and  verbal  Proft(fions  were  none  of  the  terms 
or  things  in  queftion  :  but  Accepting  or  ^eiievir.g  in  C^^nji  as 
Zm^,  Teacher ^tLC.  Thefe  are  but  concomitants  (the  two  firft) 
and  (  the  laft  )  a  confequcnt.    2.  Is  it  the  Act  [^  Accept ir.g  [] 
that  this  Brother  difputeth  againft  ,  or  is  it  the  Object  [  Chn^ 
as  Loril  ~\  as  being  none  of  the  faith  by  which  we  are  juftified  ? 
If  it  be  the  former,  i .  W  hat  Agrcerhcnt  then  hath  this  Argu  - 
mcnt  with  all  the  reft,  or  with  his  queftion?    2.  What  Agree- 
ment hath  his  Judgement  with  the  holy  Scripture ,  that  calkth 
Faith  a  Receivin/  ofchrijf  ,  and  maketh  it  equipollent  with 
\_  Believing  in  husName~\  John  I. ii- 1 2.  Col. 2.6.     3.  What 
Agreement  hath  hi?  Judgement  with  the  Proteftant  Faith,  that 
makerh  Chrift  himfelf  as  Good  to  be  the  Object  of  faith  ;  to 
beembraced,  or  chofen,  or  accepted  by  the  will,  as  well  as  the 
word  as  True,to  be  AfTented  to  by  the  underftanding.     But  if 
it  be  ihtObjeEl  that  he  meaneth  ,  then  what  force  or  fenfe  ls 
there  in  his  Argument,  from  the  terms,  [  Piirpofing^  fnten4;ng^ 
Confefjii^g?  \  Let  him  name  what  Act  he  pleafe,   foit  refpect 
this  Object ;  and  if  it  be  an  Act  of  faith  indeed,  its  all  one  as 
toour  prefentC'^ntrovcrfie.     If  he  take  Q^yftnt^  rvUliKg.  or 
ty^cceptiMgoi'  Chrift  to  be  no  act  of  Faith,  let  h^m  n.ime  any 
other  that  he  will  own  (  for  I  would  quarrel  as  little  as  may  be 
about  words,  or  impertinent  things,  j  and  let  that  be  it. 

4.  And  how  could  he  choofe  but  fee,  that  his  Argument  is 
as  much  againft  []  /tccepting  ChriJ}  at  Prieft  ]  as  aganft  [_  /ic- 
ceptly^g  himai  Lord~\  to  Justification  ?   No  doubt  but  a  man 

thac 


(304-) 


that  had  the  common  Reafon  to  write  but  fuch  a  book  as 
this,  muft  needs  fee  this  if  he  regard  what  he  faid.  And 
therefore  I  muft  take  it  for  granted  that  his  Argument  is 
agiinft  both  ahke  :  even  to  prove  that  Accepting  of,  Chrift  as 
Lord,  or  as  Saviour,  is  no  faith  or  obedience  at  all.  But  the 
Reader  will  hardly  believe  till  he  weighech  it,  that  a  waking 
raan  would  rcafon  thus  upon  fuch  a  Queftion  as  this  in 
hand. 

5.  Confenting  chat  Chrift  fhall  be  my  Lord  and  Teacher, 
and  Head,  doth  imply  a  confent,  and  fo  a  Purpofe  of  future 
obeying,  learning  and  receiving  from  him  ;  And<o  confcnt- 
ingthat  Chrift  fhall  be  my  Righteoufnefs ,  Interceflbr ,  and 
Juftifier  ,  doth  imply  a  Purpofe  of  Trufting  in  him  for  the 
future.  And  yet  this  confent  in  both  cafes  is  Juftifying  faith. 

6.  And  its  dolefull  Dodrine  (were  he  a  true  Prophet)  to 
all  Gods  Church,  that  Pttrpofa  and  Intentions  .to  believe  ani 
ohey^  are  no  more  then  may  be  found  in  Hypocrites  cr  Rtprobtttes. 
ror  though  there  are  fuperficial  unefFcdual  purpofes  and  In- 
tentions in  them,  as  there  is  an  uncffedual  faith  in  them ;  yet  if 
no  Purpofes  and  Intentions  will  prove  men  Saints ,    then  no- 
thing in  this  world  will  prove  them  Saints ;  For  the  Evidences 
of  Grace  are  more  certain  to  him  that  hath  them,  in  the  Heart 
then  in  the  outward  Aftions.    And  in  the  Heart,  the  very  new 
Creature  lyeth  much  in  thefe  two.    Defires  thcmfelves  will 
prove  true  Grace :  Much  more  when  they  rife  to  fetled  l^ur- 
pofes.    Why  elfe  did  Barnabas  exhort  the  young  beginners, 
that  Q  \vith  pHrpofe  of  Heart  thej  fJ^ouldclea'i^e  unto  the  Lord  ]] 
as  intimating  that  their  ftability  lay  in  this  j    And  iKtentions 
are  the  very  Heart  of  the  New  man.   For  Intention  is  that  ace 
thatisexercifed  about  the  End,  which  is  God  himfelf.  Inten- 
riVr^pjfw.isnomore  then  Vellevel  Amare  Dettm  ^  It  is  the 
Love  of  God  above  all.     And  if  this  be  common  to  Hypo- 
crites and  Reprobates,  what  a  cafe  are  we  in  then } 

I  hope  I  have  given  you  a  lufficient  account  of  the  Imperti- 
ncncy  and  vanity  of  lAx-iv^rners  fifteen  Arguments.  To  which 
he  adjoyneth  a  rabble  of  the  words  of  Socimans,  A^minians^ 
and  I  kno'.v  not  who,  to  affure  you  thir  we  his  new  Adverfa- 
ries, do  joyn  with  that  company  and  plead  their  caufc  :    And 

.  he 


Got) 


he  that  will  believe  him,  ;(hall  no  further  be  diftarbed  by  me  in 
his  belief. 

I  doubt  I  have  wearied  the  Read  t  already,  and  therefore  i 
fhall  only  add  a  few  words  about  a  few  more  of  the  moft  con- 
fiderablepafTagesinhisBook. 


Some  Other  of  Mr.  VK^arni^vspa/Jages- 
ofmojl  importance  conficlered. 

Trf^.  385.  \  >r  ^-  VV.  faith  []  Its  worth  the  ohfe*vi'^g  ho'^to 
XVJL  evade  the  D,(HrMhnofthe  A6ls  of  J^ith^  he. 
fith  thatfuith  (4  one  aEl  in  a  f?ioral  fenfe ,  as  Tal^'n^  a  man  to 
i>e  mj  Princej  Teacher,  Phy/itian^&iC  and  not  inaph)/i:alfence  •,, 
forJ«  it  u  mayiy  a5h,dcc.  ]  And  he  confuceth  ms  ihus  :  £  Here^ 
Ufaderf  fee  the  ^It  or  forget  (nine ft  of  the  mirj,  ivho  to  tnantaln 
hit  own  ground,  doth  often  con  ftder  faich  at  Fhjficalljf  feMtdin. 
the  Mnifrflandingand^ill  \  bfttn^hen  we  affanlt  hint  ,  will  uot 
allow  tu^  anj  Phjfictl^  hut  a  moral  »y4cc(^tkn  of  it.  ] 

Aufwer  A  moft  grofs  untruth  !  (  ani  thats  an  Arguing 
that  Faith  needeth  not)  Your  forgery  is  not  only  without 
ground,  and  contrary  to  mv  plain  and  frequent  wotds^but  con- 
trary to  the  exprefs  words  that  you  draw  your  Ob/crvation 
from.  I  fay  faith  Phyfically  taken,  is  many  af?5  •,  but  moraL- 
ly  taken  it  is  one  work  :  Hence  you  call  out  to  the  Reader  to 
oblerve,  that  I  will  not  allow  you  any  Phifical  but  a  Moral 
Acception  of  ir.  ]  Is  it  fit  to  Difpute  with  fuch  dealing  as  this  ? 
Do  you  t  link  that  I  or  any  man  of  brains  doth  doubt  whc:her 
faithheaPnyfical  Ad  C  except  them  of  Urethjt  take  it  to  be 
but  a  Paflion  and  a  Nominal  adion  ?  )  Surely  all  know  thit  it 
is  ^n  Ad  in  order  of  Nature  ,  before  it  is  a  moral  ad.  yJElUt 
wo>-4'/4,i-s  firft  cSftis  Phyjicui^  Though  MoruHter  a^Tus^  i.  e. 
aEiut  Repatativw,  may  be  butanon  admg  P'lyfically  :  Hi 
that  wilfully  famillieth  his  own  child,  doth  k  11  him  morally  or 
reputafively.  and  (olsmoralner  agens,  thatis,Reputativc.BuC 
lictbitchcriQiethhim  is  an  Agent  na:ur3i  and  moral,,  that  is, 

Rr.  Ethical. J 


(30^) 


Ethical  or  Vertuous.   I  wonder  what  made  you  think  me  of 
fach  an  opinion  chat  I  have  fo  much  wrote  againft  ? 

*  lie  next  faith,  that  [  Though  bj  one  moral  aH:  tve  rectivt ^i- 
versbtnifits^  )tt  )X'e  receive  them  to  divers  furpofcj.  J  Anfwer^ 
True  !  But  many  fuch  parages  of  yours  are  to  no  purpofe-, 
and  /uch  is  this ;  impercment  to  the  bufinefs. 

P Age  19^.  He  comcsto  myDifiindion,  where  I  fay,  that 
ex  pjtrte  Chrifii  hcfatisfieih  Jufticc  as  a  Ranfom,  and  Teach- 
eth  us  as  our  Matter,  and  Ruleth  us  as  our  King  ,  yet  ex  parte 
mflri^  it  is  but  one  and  the  fame  entire  faith  that  is  the  conditi- 
on of  our  Title  to  his  feveral  benefits :  From  (jcnce  he  ingeni- 
oufly  gathereth  that  1  fay,  £  That  faitirkathbut  one  re^eH:  to 
thofe  benefit f^  and  U  not  dtverjtfied  by  feveral  a^s ;  and  deny  the 
necejfity  ofthefe  dbfiinll  alls  in  reference  to  the  feveral  benefits 
•fChriJf.  ]  Whereas  I  only  maintained,  that  though  the  'a'^s 
be  Phyfically  diftinfl,  yet  they  arc  not  diftince  conditions  of 
our  Intereft  in  the  benefits,  but  the  fame  entire  faith  is  the  one 
condition  of  them  all.  Hereupon  he  learnedly  addtfiffcth  hi©* 
felf  to  prove  that  faith^ath  feveral  acts.  And  be  that  think- 
eth  it  worth  his  timeto  tranfcribe  and  confuce  his  Arguments, 
let  him  do  it,  for  I  do  not. 

Page  40 1 .  He  thinks  Q  ^*  need  not  dif^ute  whether  the  Re 
ception  ofChrijl  by  faith-,  be  moral  or  Phyjical :  however  it  is  net 
ayi  improptr,  but  proper  reception,"^  Anf'Ai,  i .  Ic  feems  then  wc 
need  not  difpute  whether  Chrifts  body  be  everywhere,  and 
(whether  mans  faith  do  touch  him  and  receive  him  naturally  as 
the  mouth  doth  the  meat  ?  2.  And  whereas  Ricpere ,  in  its 
firft  and  proper  fignification  wa«  wont  to  be  pad  ,  now  i«  is 
agere  :  And  whereas  confent  or  Acceptance  was  wont  to  be 
called  Receiving  but  Metonymically ,  now  it  is  becomt  a  pro- 
per Reception. 

page  3  o  3 . 3  04.  Reafoning  againft  me,he  faith,  [^  The  near- 
efi  formal  Reafon  of  a  Believers  Interefi  ,  »  noi  (jods  making  it 
a  condition,  Xchich  is  the  remote  reafon  thereof ,  but  a  Believers 
fulflltng  the  condition, Scc.^  Anf^.i.  Here  he  changeth  the 
queftion,  from  [  fVhat  u  the  near  efi  reafon  of  faiths  Inttreji  ]  to 
\_  what  is  the  near  efi  reafon  of  the 'Believers  Interefi. ")  To  the 
firft  I  fay,  [  hi  bdngmade  the  condition  of  the  Promife^J^o  the 

fecond 


Oo?) 


fecend  I  fty,  [_  The  Pr^mife  orgrar.t it  felj ,~\  2.  He  findeth  a 
IcArned  Confutation  foi^nie.z/jc.  That  ic  is  not  Gods  makiȣ,hxiz 
the  fftlfiHing  the  condition  th»t  is  the  formal  Keafon.  /^w/ft?.  Per- 
formance, that  is,Believing  maketh  faith  to  be  faith,  and  exift  ; 
but  the  Promife  makes  that  the  condition,  i  fpoke  de  effe,  and 
he  de  exifiere:  And  yet  I  ufually  fay.that  [_The  ttearef}  Keafon  of 
faiths  interefi  in  ^ttftifi cation^  is,  as  tt  is  the  condition  of  the  Pro- 
mi fes  fulfiSedJ  that  I  m\ghi  joy n  both.  5.  Note  that  in  this 
his  Afferrionhegranteih  mcthe  fumof  all  that  I  defire.  For 
if  this  be  true,  then  it  is  not  the  Nature  or  the  Inftmmenta- 
lity  of  faith  that  is  the  neareft  reafon,  as  is  ufually  faid. 

Page  200.  He  doth  as  folcmnly  call  his  Advcrfarie  adpar^ 
tes,  as  if  he  were  in  good  fadnefs  to  tell  him  what  is  the  caufa- 
lity  of  works  in  Juftificacion  :  And  failing  to  his  enumeration, 
he  tells  us  lb&t[^The  particle  A  or  Ab  notes  the  peculiar  canfali- 
ty  of  the  efficient :  the  particle  Ex  notes  the  m/iterial  castfe  :    the 
pdrticle  Per  er  B)-,  the  formal  can  ft  :  the  particle   Propter ,  the 
finale  at* fe.~]    Anfw.  I  mufl  erave  pardon  of  the  Reader  while  - 
I  fuppofe  all  this  to  be  currant,  that  I  may  anfwer  ad  homintm. 
And  then  i .  It  feems  faith  is  not  the  efficient  caufe,and  there- 
fore not  the  Inftruraental  caufe  :  For  ^4  or  ab  is  not  affixed  to 
ic,  in  this  bufincfs.     2.  It  fecms  then  that  faith  is  the  formal 
caufe  of  Juftification,  becaufewe  are  faid  to  be  Juftified  ""'t' 
-sioEo)?    /?tf)»».3.22  25,30,  d'/'^^/wQ  By  Faith  ]  So  that  faith 
is  come  to  higher  promotion  then  to  be  an  Inftrumental  effici- 
ent caufe.     3.  Hence  it  feems  alio  that  faith  ,   even  the  fame 
faith  is  [_  the  material  can fe  j  too  :    For  moft  certainly  we  are 
faid  to  be  juftified  ex  fije  :  iK'^nT^wi-.  Rom.^.z6,^o.  Rom.f. 
i.C;4/.2.i6.  &3. 8,7, 5,9,2a  24. &  5.5.  fa»/.i.l^.     Whether 
txfide  ^  W-tfyf  do  indeed  exprefs  an  Inftrumental  efficient  ^\ 
leave  to  confiderarion  :  But  fure  I  am  it  fitly  expreffeth  the  In» 
tereft  of  a  condition.     And  if  Mr.  fr,  will  needs  advance  faith 
hereby  to  be  the  m^ter  of  our  Rightcoufnefs ,  it  muft  be  biiE 
of  our  fubordinate  particular  Evangelical  righteoufnefs,  which 
confifteth  in  fulfilling  the  eondi.ton  of  Juftihcation. 

Chap.'y.pstg.ig.lO-ili*  He  fpends  a  Chapter  to  open  to  us 
the  meaning  of  [  fiaes^jnajftfltficat.]  And  profcffech  that  it 
is. the  Cardo  s«»troverji<t  ;    yea  ic  was  the  remembrance  of 

Rr  2  •  this 


(3o8) 

this  diftindion  and  the  light  he  received  by  it  that  intfuced 
him  to  enrer  on  this  Difcourfe  •  and  that  ii  is  the  hifib  of  his 
foliowing  extrcication.  And  what  think  you  is  the  happy 
Light  [hat  dcferveth  all  ths  oftencation  >  *A  hy  i.  On  the 
Negr.tivc  wc  are  fatisfi'ii  chat  he  means  not  [_!ih.;t  fiiej  ejH* 
fidescando :  j  rtnd  thoM  weare  fecure  that  he  means  nothing 
that  can  hurt  his  Adveriaries  caufe.  2.  The  Ltght  then  is  all 
but  this[^  Th'^'  ^Ha  here  u  not  taken  Rtduflicativeibi4t  jptc^ji^A' 
tive,  when  hj  the  p^rticte  qua  or  quatenus,  thereUs  fowe  wett'  or 
ftngtilar  kind  oj  Denomination  added  to  the  fuhjtEi  of  the  Propoji- 
tio»  :  <ti  when  ^e  fay,  man  oi  a  reafonahle creature  feeleth  :  In 
thM  latter  fer.ce  (  faith  he  )  /  believe  the  particle  qua  or  quate- 
nus is  tak^en^  -when  Vce  do  not  fay,  faith  as  faith,  hut  faith  as  Ju^i- 
f)ing,'^\t'>  as aGruce  de/^ined  to  rhi^  aB  or  operation  of  Juflifj- 
tng./look^i  on  Chrif}  oi  Saviour.'^ 

<iy4njw.  This  Chapter  was  worth  the  obferving.  For  if  this 
he  the  Bafis  of  all  the  Exercitation,  and  the  Light  that  Gene- 
rated all  t!  e  reftjthe  difparch  of  this  may  ferve  for  all.  It  feenris 
by  his  words  he  had  look'c  into  Reehe's  DiJIinClions  in  the  end 
of  Caflanetu^  and  raeeing  with  Reduplicative  and  Ifecificative^ 
admired  the  diftinction  as  fome  rare  Difcovery  :  and  this  preg- 
nant fruitful  Diftinction  begot  a  Volume,  before  it  was  half 
underftcod  it  (elf.  Had  he  but  read  the  large  Schemes  for  ex- 
plaining ,^a  or  ^^4^f«»f  in  others ,  its  like  it  would  have 
either  begot  a  larger  Volume,  or  by  informing  or  confounding 
him,  have  prevented  this.  Firft,  he  difowneth  the  RedupUca- 
rtVf  fence  ;  and  then  owneth  the  Ifecificative.  But  i.  He 
feeth  not, it  feems,  the  infufficiency  cf  this  diftinction  ;  2  Nor 
the  meaning  of  it ;  3 .  Nor  could  well  apply  it  to  the  fubject 
inhand.  Of thefirf^  I  (hall fpeakanon.  Thefecondappear- 
ethbyhfsDefcription,hisInftance,  and  his  Application.  He 
defcribeth  it  to  be  [  ffhen  there  it  Jome  »f\V  or  fngular  kj^dof 
Denomination  added  to  the  fubjeSl  of  the  Propofition.^  i .  And 
why  may  it  not  be  added  alfo  to  the  Prrdicate^as  well  as  it  may 
RedHplicativelj  fas  Motus  efi  aUns  mobitu  quatenus  efl  mobile. 
2.  There  are  many  new  kinds  of  Denominations  that  will 
not  ferve  for  your  ^ecificative  Quatenfu.  The  inftance  you 
•give  is,  r  06  when  tve  fay  man  04  a  Re«fonable  creature  f^ileth.  ] 

This 


C3°p) 


This  was  but  an  unhappy  Tranflation  of  [Honio  t^uatetturani^ 
maI  efi  feKfihlllf^  and  its  true  in  the  Latine,  how  falfe  foever 
in  the  Englifh.    For  the  Application,    i.  You  fay  [^  you  ^  5*- 
lHve~]  its  thus  takjn.  As  if  you  did  but  Bslteve,  and  not  know 
your  own  meaning  in  the  Bafis  of  your  Exercitation.  2.  Your 
Specificative  Quatenw  xsCatifalt  or  fignifieJi  the  Reafon  of 
the  thing,  either  of  the  Predication  or  the  thiiig  predicate: 
But  fo  cannot  your  Bafis  hold  good.    For  faith  doth  not  lool^ 
on  Chrift  as  a  Saviour  (  as  you  pleafe  Metaphorically  to  fpcak) 
^*Ci?»/>it  Juftifieth  .-  for  its  Nature  is  before  the  effed  ,    and 
therefore  cannot  the  effed  be  given  as  the  caufe  of  it  j  (unlefs 
it  were  the  final  caufe-  of  which  anon.) 

Qua  or  qnntenus  properly  and  according  to  the  common  ufe 
fignifierh  the  proper  reafon  of  the  thing  or  predication^  and  is 
appliable  only  to  that  which  is  ipoken  yrtrd  ttbu-ic,-.    As  to  the 
terms,  fomerimes  there  is  a  Reduplication  of  the  fame  term^ 
fometimes  that  reduplication  is  of  the  m..tier^ni  in  otktr  term.\ 
as  in  a  definition,  or  fynominal  words,  or  it  is  implyed  :  fome- 
times ic  is  the  terms  of  the  Predicate  or  ^ttrihuie  thit  is  Re- 
dnplicatc;  {ovcitt\mQs\X.\imthdMt  ^  Re  Amplication  ;  And  then 
fometimes  it  giveth  a  Reafon  from  an  S^er.t  aI  Part  :  forac- 
time  from  the  ^*«fr;V.«/iY4r«r*  ;  fometime  (rora  the  Specific^ 
Nature  '  fometime  from  an  -^cctAent  :  and  thofe  are  divers : 
fometime  from  a  ^u  ^Ity  :  (ometime  from  Qjumtit)  :  fome- 
time from /Jf/rfrxo«  ;  z\\il\\2il\i  multtfarioM  :    If  we  fhould 
run  into  all  the  fences  of  this  Term  which  Mr.  iv.  doth  lap  up 
in  the  word  [_  Specificathe  ~]  the  words  might  ejLceed  the  pro- 
fit.   And  its  to  be  noted  chit  ufually  the  term  is  refpcdive  as 
to  feme  other  thing  excluded  which  is  contrsd  ftind  ;  &:  fo  we 
give  fometimes  a  more  Rim^teaKJ  J(»eral,2i  fometime  a  neer- 
cr  and  mora  fpecial  'AeaK;n  by  Qua  or  qtiAttnm.  As  ifycu  mix 
^  purging  Elcduary  in  your  Di  ui\ ,  I  fay  th-at  Purgeth  (jur.te' 
»;«wfi^.r(aff.:^,  wlich  is  to  exclude  the  1)  i^.k.  from  being  Pur- 
gitive.   If  I  fpeak  of  the  E/eHudry,  I  may  fay  that  it  purgeth 
tjuaterus  DiagrUiate,  to  exclude  miny  other  Ingredients  from 
being  Purgative.    But  if  I  fpeak  ottUe^iJ^ridtuw,  1  may  fay 
that  it  Purgeth  as  hdving  an  EltHive  ficnltj^  &c.    totx.lad* 
other  Realons  of  its  ope:  ation. 

Rr  ^  Now 


Oio) 


Now  for  the  opening  of  the  matter  in  hand,  let  us  try  cer- 
tain Propofitions  that  may  be  fuppofed  to  be  laid  down  con- 
cerning Faith. 

[]  I.  Faith  as  faith  jfifiifitth']  This  is  True ,  taken  Uxely, 
for  the  excluding  of  [_  faith  m  a  meer  Phyficala^lt  c  merittrU 
tfU6:dcc.  2  hut  it  isfaife  firiSllj  taken,as  fignifying  the  formal  or 
neareft  reafon. 

So  [[2.  Fides  i»  Chriflum^M4talii]f4(}ific4t'\  that  is  ,  W 
fihs  iffjpecie]  is  trtte,  liken  Laxclj  andmateriaUy  to  exclude  all 
0!;her  Faith  :  q  d.  It  is  not  faith  in  Peter  or  Paul,  bnt  faith  in 
f^hr'fi  M  fuch  that  is  the  matter  deputed^  to  be  the  condition  of 
Juftification.  But  its/^//ir  taken  jiriBly^derationefortnali. 

3 .  So  []  This  faith  a*  it  is  an  y^pprehenfion  or  Acceptance  of 
Chrii},jfi(fifieth.2  Its  true,  Materialittr  &  Remotiw^  Laxly: 
but  falfeformaliter  ^  firi^e^e  ratione  prexima.  For  this  is 
the  fame  in  other  terms  with  the  fecond. 

So  H  4«  Faith  juflifieth  as  an  ^nfirumenul efficient  cattfe  of 
our  Jufitficatisn.]  Izsfaife  in  every  tolerable  fence. 

So  {_$■  Faith  juflifieth  Od  an  Infirument  of  receiving  Chrifl.'] 
Its  true,  I.  taking  the  word  {Infirnment  ]  Metaphorically, 
and  meaning  only  the  Nature  of  this  faith,  which  is  [  to  Believe 
in  and  Accept  Chrif}.']  i,  and  taking  J^^atenm  remotely  Jaxely^ 
and  materially  only,q.d.  Faith  is  the  SUEitd  matter  ff  the  condi* 
tion  (or  is  ehofen  to  be  the  condition  of  Juftification  J  for  this 
Aptitttdey  as,  or  becaufe  it  ii  a  Reception  or  Acceptance  of  ^hrifi. 
But  its  falfc,  I .  Taking  an  [  In/lrnment  "^firi^lj  and  LogicttU  - 
ly,  2.  and  fpeaking  de  ratione  formali. 

So  [_^'  Faith  as  a  believing  in  Chrifis  facrifice  ^  jufli^tth.'] 
Its  true,  Luxly,  Materialiter  &  partialiter  i  that  is,  Thia  oTt 
of  faith  «  part  of  the  matter  of  the  condition.  But  its  falfe,/«n*4' 
liter  dt  ratione  froxima. 

So  C  7»  Faith  juflifieth  Mly  otitis  a  "Believing  in  Chrijlsfd' 
crifice  or  Righteoufhefs.]  Its  falfe  both  de  materia  &  derations 
formali. 

So  [  8 .  Faith  as  JufUfyingis  only  a  Believing  in^  or  Accept" 
ingChrifias  ourRanfom^  Here  isdarknefs,  and  either  non- 
fence  or  falfe  dodrine.  I.  {Asjtifiifying']  fignifieth  either 
t  ^  ajtijlifying  efficient  cattfe  ]  2.  Or  [as  the  merit  or  mmer  of 

9ur 


tUr  Kightemfnffs  P^  5 .  Or  ^m  the  me  am  i.  e.  cmditiort  of  ettr 
Righteoufntfs  ,  of  which  fttfiification  u  aconfejutJtt   and  fir,  a  i 
caufe.'^  In  the  firft  fenfc  it  is  every  way  falfe.    In  the  fecond 
fcnfe  it  is  every  way  fallc ,  fpeaking  of  our  Univerfal  Righce- 
.  oufpefs.   In  the  third  fenfe,  if  fpoken  laxely  de  materia^xii  falfe, 
bccaufe  of  the  exdufive  [  Only.  ]  And  if  fpaken  dt  raiionefor'-* 
malive/proxima,    i.   Itsprepoftereus  to  put  the  Confcquent 
~beforethe  Antecedcnt,ifyou  {^dkde ordine exequensii :  1.  And 
it  is  falfe:  Vor  [t^aa  J  f»fiif,c  arts']  fpeaketh  of  Juftificationas 
the  confequentjOr  as  an  ad,  and  not  of  the  Nature  of  Faith  ic 
felf.     And  therefore  [  ^ua  fufiificaMs  ]  f|iith  u  nothing  (  much 
iefsthatadafone.)     For  it  is  not  ditjfe  ftdei  that  the   term 
fpeaks,  but  of  the  confequent  •,  So  that  the  [_  Fides  atujufiifi- 
canseft']  what  ever  a(^  you  mention,  isabfurd  andunfound: 
For  as  n<M  jufiificat  ejftattnns  ffl^itanon  #/?  qttattntu  Jftfitfcai , 
its  Effence  being  pre-fuppofed.  Cut  if  you  fpeak  deordine  /«- 
rentionts ,v'vL.  ([  Faith  iueieSiedd  mtans  ar  condition  ^fjufifi" 
Cation  ii  onlj  a  'Belitving  in  Chriflsfairi-^ce.  ]]  then  Laxdy  ^ 
cJTf/iffr/W/y  it  would  bcTrue,  if  it  were  not  for  the[[  only."] 
But  becaufe  of  that  it  isfalfc^both  de  muteria  &  de  rat  tone  for- 
mali.  I, he  nature  of  it  is  before  its  Office. 

So  '[  9.  Faith  04  defignedto  this  aB  or  optration  of  Jf^ftifyi^igt 
looks  on  Chrifi  as  a  Saviour.  ]    This  is  Mr.  J^/.  AfTertion.    But 
"^  jtfiifji'fg  is  not  an  ad  or  cperatron  oi  faith  ;  but  of  6od  on 
the  Believer.     2.  But  if  you  mean  but  conftitucing  it  the  con- 
dicionof  juftificarion,ch€n  i.  the  wrong eni is fei  frrft  :  For 
it  doth  not  look  at  Chrift,  as  its  made  the  condition  •,  but  its 
made  the  condition,  becaufe  being  an  Accepting  of  Chrift,  its 
Apt  for  chat  Office.    So  that  Materially  and  L^Xih  ,  its  thus 
true ;    fa  Saviour,comprehendeth  Chrifts  Kingly  and  Prophe- 
tical Offices,  and  evcrlafling  Pricfthood  in  Heaven  )  Bat  this 
is  nothing  to  the  formal  Reifonof  ics  Intcrcft  in  Juftifica- 
tioiT. 

Hut  left  you  think  that  [  c^ua  Jujiificaw^  hath  no  proper 
place,  I  further  inf^ance  [  9.  Faith  as  jf*f^fyi»g  t^  difli»si  front 
^atth as  entitling  to  Heaven^  or  other  promifed  mercier.]  Thisis 
true  (  fuppofingjuftificationand  the  faid  Title  to  Glory  to 
d(0cr.^  l^ut  this  is  but  a  denomination  of  the  fame  faith  from 

its 


] 


(Pi) 


its  J^ers  confequents.  As  my  lighting  a  candle  being  one  aftU 
on  is  A^'o  ili<tininAni  (  at  caf*f-i  moralii,  )  (^  calffucient ;  e^ 
^uaiflumUan  no-4  e^  c  ale  facie  ns.     So  a  womans  niirrying  a. 
Prince,  is  an  Honouring,  enriching  ad  :  an  J  qua  loonottri-rgy  it 
is  no:  emiching.    Bjc  its  the  fame  e.icire  undivid.d  aft  or  An^- 
teccdcnt  Mean?,  or  Condi  ion,   that  is  thus  varioufly  denomi- 
nated from  fcveral  Benefits.     And  thus  ReIa:ionj  may  give, 
divers  deriom  narions  to  the  fame  perlon  ;    the  fimemanmay. 
be  confidered  as  a  Father, as  a  Phyfitian,  as  a  Subject, c^r. 

So  lo.  FAITH  WHICH  IS  AN  EFFECTUAL  AC- 
CEPTANCE OF  and  AFFIANCE  IN  CHRIST  AS^ 
CHR  ST,  was  CHOSEN  and  ORDAINED  by  God  the 
Condition  of  Jujiification  and  Life,  hecaufe  his  Wifdom  fn^  it  fit, 
forth,  t  Office^  andtha-t  fitnefs  Ijethin  its  resptCl  to  theObjetl. 
andCJodsends  C  fuppofing  wemay  aflign  Reafonsor  caufesof 
Gods  Will,  j  'By  this  faith  (io  conftituted  the  Condition)  tve. 
a^e  aaually  JUSTIFIED  AS  TIS  THE  PERFORMED. 
CONDITION  OF  GODS  PROMISE.]  Th.s  is  the  plaia 
Truth  mfew  and  cafieword?. .    - 

By  what  is  faid  you  may  fee  that  when  they  fay  \  faith  at  Ju- 
[iif)iyig  1  is  this  or  that,  it  is  both  prepofterous,  and  the  [  qna  3 
as  diftinft  from  the  [  ^ua  ~]  de  ratione  formalin  caufally  fpoken, 
is.plaialy  fah'e  :  But  in  other  cafesi  Laxely  and  AiateriaHy^  the 
[]  tjua  J  fignifieth  the  fame  as  the  [  qua  ]  with  the  exdufion  of 
other  matter.  And  when  they  have  raifed  never  fo  great  a  duft, 
the  Queftion  is  but  this  :  whether  we  are  jstflified  bj  Believing 
in.  C^orifi  as  Chrift,  or  only  in  Chrifl  as  a  Ranfom  ]  (  and  yet  ai 
a  Ranfom  and  as  dying  he  purchafeth  SandiHcation  as  well  as 
JuftiScationJ  Or.  [  fTbether  faith  in  Chrijl  as  Chrifi  ,  or  only 
faith  in  Chrifi  at  Pftrchafing  Jfif}ificatio»y  be  the  condition  of  our 
ftifiifcation.~] 

Reader ,  Having  (hewed  the  darkncfs  of  that  Light  that 
caufed  Mr.  Ws.  Excrcitation,  and  overthrown  its  Balls,  I  (hall 
pK  thee  to  no  further  trouble.; 


It): 


(5'3) 

ummmmmMMMMu 

To  my  Reverend  Brother  Mr.  fohn 
lf^ani€r,V  r^SLcher  of  the  Gofpel  at 
Chrifts  Church  in  HantJJ.nre- 


s:.-, 

THofi^h  (  tkroHghthe  privacy  of  mjhal;nation  )   I  never  fa 
much  as  heard  of  jonr  r.amey  befort ymr  Booh^ofthe  Objeft 
««d(  Office  of  faith  vas  Jn  tht  Prefs ;  yet  ttpon  tkt  peruf^lofit 
I  CO  nfidtntl^  conclude  i  that  a  z.eal  for  God  ^  and  that  ^h'ch  Joh 
•verily  thtKl^ro  be  hii  Trttthjjith  moved jc^  to  thii  underrakj^<^  i 
and  doHbtUfs  yott  th'tr.k^  that  you  huve  Jc>:e    Gcd  ftrvice  bj  it. 
1  love  your  zeal :  and  your  ind  gnation  jrrjinfi  Error  ^   and  your 
tendernefe  of  fo  g^reat  .<  folnt  as  ihat  ofjuji.fcatictt.     And  could 
J  fn  I  your  Light  to  be  a»fwcrab!e  to  jju^heat ,  J  hope  I  fh$uld 
alfo  love  ani  honow  it  :  Had  ion  not  talker,  me  (ycith  the  tWo  Re- 
vcrin^  Brethrtn'^'ho^K  jou  oppose  )  /o  ^f  t  lie  enemies  of  the  per- 
fonar.d  Grace  of  theLord  Jefus.or  the  followers  of  ihem(<i/ 
yonf^r,  Efif.pig^6.)  I  :im  pirfx^^fdtd  yo'i  )SyuH>;ct  hjvf  either 
called  fu  fo^  or  t h^ught  your  felf  cJ'ed to  this  ^i fault,     t^nd  if 
J  love  ChriflJ  muji  love  th^t  tr.aK  that  hatethme,  though  mifla- ' 
l'ingly,for  thef^ke  of  (^hrifl.  Th^t  pnntiple  Witl.  in  you  that  hitk 
wade  Chrifl  and  Truth  fo  dear  to  you^  that  yau  rije  up  for  that 
which  fetmeth  to  you  to  be  Truth,  I  hope  ^i/lgrorv  ti/ljou  attain 
perfeRior/m  thxt  yv)' Id  of  Light  that  will  end  our  d  jferer.ce!,    I 
pjall  not  go  about  to  deprecate  jour  indignation  for  my  plain  eX' 
preJpioKs  tn  thuf  Defence,  When  {he  nature  of  your  matter  dli  re^ 
quire  them  :  For  I  am  not  fo  unreafonable  ai  to  expel}  that  fur 
vrordi  fjouldrecor.cile  a  good  man  ts  thofe  that  he  takei  to  be  f«f~ 
wies  to  Chrifl,  or  to  thf'r  followers,     ^ut  as  I  Ctm  truly  faj  if 
Ikmiv  rvhatii  in  my  heart i  that  ike  Reading  rf  yoftr  'Book,  hath 

Sf  '  bred 


(5'4) 


i^reJ  no  ertmity  tojau  in  my  hrcjl^  but  only  J^m.-V^^u  love  to  jour 
Ktal^yvith  ac»n$pa[fion  of  -jjOHr  darkncfi^and  a  d  Jl  kf  of  your  fo 
ntHch  confidence  in  the  durk^ ;  fo  it  pi  ill  be  my  CAte  as  it  U  mj  du- 
tj^  to  lov:  you  m  4  miJlAkjM  fervAKt  ofCh  ifl,  though  yctt  Psottld 
$ake  me  for  hli gretitefl  ttttmj.  And  therefore  being  confciom 
»fno  yforfe  affe^ions  to  you^  I  defire'th^t  Jujlice  ofj-iu^asto  I'w- 
fute  the  Hngratefnlt  pajfaget  that  yon  meet  ^ith,  to  my  apprehen. 
fion  of  the  badnefs  of  jonr  catife  and  Arguments,  and  a  compajfion 
to  the  poor  Church  that  mnfl  be  troubled  and  temfted^  andendxK- 
gereib)  fuch  grofs  mifiakfj,and  not  toaiy  contempt  of  your  per- 
fon^  with  which  I  meddle  not,  but  a^s  you  are  the  iyinthor  ofthoft 
jdrgnmertts. 

In  your  Treface  f  find  a  Lk^  impnfed  b)  you  on  your  Anfwt- 
rer^which  I  have  not  fully  obferved  :     I.   Becaufe  I  hid'^ritten 
my  Reply  to  your  Arguments  a  confidtr^ble  time  before  ^  fa^ 
your  Preface  •,   For  tt  fell  out  that  I  frfl  ft^  your  B'iok^  without 
ihe  Spifile  and  Preface.      2-  'Bec-^ufe  '  thought  it  fi^tefi  to  fol- 
ic^ the  Method  that  my  SubjsB  and  the  Riaiers  hdifcation  did 
require.      3 .   Tet  ^id  I  once  purpofe  ta  have  anfrcered  all  that  wm 
of  moment  inymr  Book  agair-fithe  Iruth:  but  upon  trial  I  found 
your  Reafons  fo  inconjiderab'e,  th^t  v  earinefs  interrupted  me  and 
put  an  end  to  my  Reply ,  f.r.dvpith.d  I" grew  confident  th^t  my  U- 
bour  >X>euld  be  to  little  purpofe.     For  I  dare  venture  any  judui- 
otfi  Divine  upon  your  'Book,  w.thrut  the  help  of  a  Reply  '.   And  for 
therefi.it  16  nctreplyingthafnill  ffrve  turn  :  but  either prtju- 
dice  will  hold  them  to  the  fide  that  they  have  takfn^  or  clfe  they 
VeiUthini^him  inthe  right  that  hath  the  laji  word  :  Vchen  thty 
have  read  mine,they  will  think  that  I  am  in  the  right  ■,  and  When 
they  have  again  read  youys  ,  they  will  thinks  that  you  carry  the 
caufe  :  and  when  they  read  my  Reply  agatn/hsj  will  fay, you  ^ere 
niflaks'i ;  but  ufually  they  will  go  With  the  party  that  ii  in  great- 
efl  credit ^  or  hath  mofl  tut erefi  in  them  ^  or  advantage  on  them. 
But  yet  I  think^you  Will  find  that  none  of  your  firength  againfl 
me  ii  ti?gltUed  :  For  I  can  truly  fay,  that  when  i think  not  meet 
to  Anf\'ver  allthat  amar,  hath  faid,  Ineverpafs  by  that  which  I 
take  to  fe  his  firength,  but  purpofely  call  out  that,  and  leive  that 
Vehich  1 1  kink  ts  fo  grofly  weak  ^^  to  need  no  anfwer:     So  wuch 
9fymr  te»  Dtm^fids  or  LaW$  as  I  apprehended  nece^arf^  I  have 

here 


(?>0 


k 


htre  anffvered ;  fup^oftyig  -what  I  hdd  /UU  of  the  fame  poifttJ  «• 
rttji  f^Ji  DijpHtation ,  \)chich  I  /4\V  no  Resfon  too  of  tin  to  Rf 
peat. 

I  am  none  ofthofe  that  b'aTC  you  for  too  much  ^  f  the  Met4- 
pbyficks,  hutrathey  m,r  vail  that  youfea^ednot  leji  jour  MttA' 
fhjfical  Reader  W///  vtrcng  yon  by  ml f- applying  jour  cited%z\\.t^' 
kius  contrary  to  your  better  opimon  of  your  jelf  ,  and  take  both 
your  Schcgkius  ai^dyour  Scaliger/(7r  'Prophets  that  could  fpeak 
Oi  if  they  had  read  your  'Baok^^  a-iti  been  ac^uai}:tedV^ithjonrar' 
guings.  Titit  itfeemsyoH  are  not  thefi'-Ji  of  that  ivaj. 

By  your  Arguments  in  your  Pnface,  I  percdieyoa  think,  it 
a  matter  of  very  great  morKcnt  to  jour  cauje^  to  f  rove  that  there 
^re  divers  aHs  of  faith^  y»htreas  I  am  fo  far  from  denying  it , 
that  1  am  ready  to  demon/irate  ,  that  even  the  faith  by  vrhich  tt'e 
are  fufiified^iU  liker  to  have  tnentjf  aHs  then  one  onlj  ^  bttt  many 
certainly  it  hath.  Tourfi^J}  Argument  is,  from  the dferefit  cb- 
jeUs  becaufethiOb\eBs fpecifiethe  ASlt.  Afp/fficievt  Argument 
which  no  man  can  confute.  But  I .  This  n  no  proof  ^  that  one  at! 
cnly  is  it  thatwf-are  juflifiedbj,  2.  fVhere  jou  add  th^it  Jufii- 
fjing  Faith  hath  not  re^ed  to  Chnf}  as  Lord  rorrnalircr,^(?«  beg 
the  J^ejlion,and  ajfert  no  light  mijlttk^e.  But  where  yon  add  i  in 
its  ad  of  Juftifying'  yo'4  d-j  but  obtrude  upon  m  your  funda- 
mental  Error  (  which  le-^deihyou  to  tharefl  )  by  y^^ked  affrmar 
tions.  Faith  hath  properly  no  juflifying  a^  :  Jaftificarc  eft  ef- 
ficere.  Faith  doth  not  iff-.El  our  iu/iifica'ion  :  ttv  are  jufi/ficd by 
faith  indeedi ,  but  not  as  by  an  e^cient  caufe  nnlefs  Joh  Will  take 
J  unification  for  SanHijicaticn  \  Fcrreal^'fa'ttutive  Mutatis 
on!  it  doth  ffeEl  j  but  the  Jus  or  Title  to  Any  me'^cy  in  the  world 
it  cannot  Effc(^,  bttt  Accept  wh^in  'jfered.  If  jcu  fi'.n^or  fee  fa 
plain  aTruth  in  its  Evidence,  yit  oberve  by  the  words  of  the  Re- 
verend B>'other  th^t  is  my  Opponent  in  the(eco  a  Difputati^n^and 
by  your  Prefactrs  Dr.Ki:)d&Uccurfejhat  its  apa/five  iy-Jirum^r." 
taltty  that  the  Defenders  of  y>w  caufe  at  lafl  art  driven  to -^  tind 
therefore  talk,  not  of  its  ad  of  Juftifying  unle/s  you  rviU 
mean  Gods  ad  of  Juftifying  which  fai:h  is  the  Condition  of. 
Aniwhereoi  jou  w^ji^f  unbelief  to  be  formally  a  flighting  and 
negleding  Chrift  as  a  Saviour  and  effedively  ('  you  muji  mean 
only  effeUivt  &  non  formaliter  )  a  denying  fubjection  to  him 

Sf  2  as 


c 


5'^) 


as  Lord.  iCoueYr  fogrtatbutfo  nreantrror,  thtt  1  fttp^eftif 
tit^dUfi  t9  confute  it.  All  (^krifiians  a*  far  at  I  can  learn  kavt 
Iften  till  no"^  agrtei^tljM  Beliiving  in  ^hrift  at  Prophet  and  King 
i^  areal  pxrt  cffitith,  Andth^t»nbeliefor  rejeHingloim  xiPrc- 
pbtt  and  Kivg  ts  a  reul  p.irt  of  unbelief. 

Tourfecend  yirgument  is  from  the  different  fubjcds  ^  ivhere 
■joHgive  m  trvyfnch palpable  Ftdimty  that  its  a  warder  jch  c<!k 
make  your  felf  believe  them^  much  more  that  you  fly^iutd  lay  fo 
griAt  a  f}refso!ifuch<ib[nrdiiief.     The  frjl  uth^t    the  Aft  of 
Failh  is  in  feveral  faculties  :  and  you  clfyv^jere  gve  m  to  under- 
jlandthat  it  ts  onePhyfical  Act  that  jou  mear.    ty^nddopn 
think^in good  (admfs  th.tt  one  fi^gle  Phjfical  aU  can  be  the  a^  of 
both  the  faculties  f    The  fecond  t-i  that  the  fear  ,    love  and  obe- 
dience to  Chrift  as  King  i«  but  in  the  Will.     E'it  I.  fihat  Hea- 
ders dojoH  expe^,  th^t  rvill  tak^e  ayj  AfferttsM  of  Fcar, Love,  and 
Obedience,  in  fieadofan  aJfertJon  cot^cerni'ig  Faith  ?    tf'ere  jou 
Ttot  comparing  faith  in  Chrifl  as  Kir-g,    \\-ith  fdth  in  Chnjl  oi 
Priefionly?  Andwhj  fpe^k  you  net  of  f At th  in  one  part  of  your 
somparifoKyOs  Tvefl  <u  in  the  other  f  Tour  conciujlon  non  u  nothing 
to  the ^Ittejiion  ?     2.  Or  if  jott  wean  that  Faith  in  Chrift  as 
Kingisnotin  both  faculties,  4*  Wr^^  Faith  in  Chrift  as  P.ieft 
or  facrifice,  dii  you  think^th^tt  any  man  of  ordinary  underfiaKd- 
lag  would  ever  believe  you  without  any  proof  ,'  cr  that  ever  fuch 
a  thirig  can  be  proved  ? 

Your  third  Argument  ii^  [Becaufe  they  are  in  a  different  time 
txerted ;  the  one,  that  ii.  Faith  as  Juftifying,  being  precedane- 
OUS  to  the  other,  (  and  to  other  Gruces  )  3  Anfw.  tVenderfptli ! 
U  that  man  jafii^ed  thit  believeth  not  tn  Chrifi  as  the  King  and 
Prophet  of  the  Church  ?  Do  you  believe  thi^  your  ftlf  ?  why  then 
an  Infiiel  U  jufiifed  by  faith.  The  'Belief  in  Chrifi  as  a  Sacri- 
fice or  Priefi  only,  ii  not  the  Chrifiian  faith  ;  it  «  not  faith  ii 
Ckrifi  properly ^  becaufe  it  u  not  faith  tn  Chrijf  m  Chriji.  Fcr 
Chrifi  04  Prie(l  only  is  net  Chrifl.  A  Heart  only  is  not  Corpus 
humanum:  e^^  Body  c-*;/^  a  »<?:/»  Man-,  ^here  there  art  three 
ejfential  pjtrts,  one  of  them  Is  not  the  Things  without  the  reji.  The 
name  ^  Jefus  Chrift  1  figmfeth  the  office  oi  well  oa  the  ferfon.  It 
iieffentiilto  that  Offic^^  that  he  be  Prophet  and  King,  And  here- 
by you  fitw  that  you  do  rot  cnlj  diftinguifh  but  diivide.For  "^here 

there 


C?'?) 


:here  U  a  difianct  of  time  htt^ien  the  AHs  ,  there  U  a  Mvijfay;. 
Do  jou  thinks  that  We  are  Ckri^i  enemies  ,  cr  foUo'Ofers  ofthtm, 
ttnlefsrvemlihtlieveyoHth-it  antM  u  J (t(iifiid  hy  Believing  vi 
ChriJ}  only  as  a  T*riefl  or  R:ir;fotn^  or  in  hs  Right ei}f4fne^s^  bsfore 
ever  he  believe  in  him  iu  King  And  Lord  (ttndfo  tts  Te^cbtr^&CC. ) 
If  I  had  faid  that  you  are  Chrijl  s  enemy  for  fuoh  D)ilrine^''X'hich^ 
thinkjyou^had  h^d  the  fairer  pretence  for  iof  cenfare  ?  But  T  Am 
far  p'omfayi>jgfo,orthinkjn^tt.  I k^20\\>  that  the  Ajfent  to  ths 
ejfential  Articles  of  Chrifiiar.itj ^containeth  ^^'a^ty  A^s^and  that 
our  Confent  and  A^tnce  are  many  Phyfical  AHsy  Oi  thep^rtJ  tf 
Chrtfit  Gff:e  are  ma>}y  Qb'je^s.  But  yet  I  [do  not  think, ^«r)  am 
ccreain  that  all thefe  phyfic^A^s  concur  to  WAke  up  th.it  lMo- 
ral  A-t  which ii cafledCh^ian^  or  favir.g^or  Jfifi'f)ing  Faith  ; 
anJ  that  he  that  hlieveth  notinChrifl  as  to  all  thtt  ia  ejfe»4int 
to  Chrifl^  «  no  Chrijiian.  And  a  man  «  nqt  jujiified  by  Faith 
before  heis  aChrifiian.  tyind truly  Sir  ^  meuth^tare  iotij  to 
flie  from  the  Light ,  and  that  love  the  Trnth  ,  and  dilifentlj/ 
feek,  it  (  a*  heartily^  if  not  oi  happily  as  yon  )  »»«/?  yet  needs  teli 
yofi^  that  if  jot*  produce  your  Aiormalnckj  an  hundred  timts,  and 
cant  over  and  over  [  a  Papift,  a  Socinian,  an  Arminian  j  and  an 
Arminian,  a  Socinian  and  a  Papift]  their  Hnderfiandingtn'ill  ne- 
ver  the  m^re  be  perfwadedtj  embrJice  your  Delufions ,  though 
yo'a  fjottld  fay  that  the  Kingdom  ofC^ol  doth  confifi  in  them. 

Tour  fourth  Argument  is  that ,  []  There  is  a  difference  in 
Nature,EScacy,  Energy,  and  Opera  :ion  ;  therefore  the  Acts 
arc  not  the  fame. "]  Anfw.  i .  1  maintained  the  conclufon  (  th^e 
faith  hath  different  A^ls  )  before  ever  1  heard  of  your  name  -y 
and  have  no  reafon  notv  to  denie  it.  l.  The  difference  of  Natter  (^ 
I  grant  you  between  many  AHs  of  faith  ;  but  '^hatyoH  mean  by 
the  Efficacy,  Energy ,  and  Operation  ,  he  th^t  ho'A's  can  tell ; 
for  I  cannot. 

But  flilll deflre  youto  k.no)v  that  I  aeny  faith  to  have  any 
efficient  operation  in  Jttfiifyng  ^^s^or  that  it  id  an  efficient  eaufe  cf 
our  JuJl>fication  j  efptciaUy  its  no  Phyfical  efficient ;  jou  add  a 
grange  proof  of  your  Affertion^  [_  viz.  For  faith  as  Juftifying 
makes  a  myftical  Union  and  relative  change  on  the  perfon  ; 
but  faith  as  working  and  fandifying  proJuceth  a  moral  union 
withChrift.(^f^.]/i«l/w.  i.  Faith  as  juflifjing  doth  only  fujli- 

Sf  3  fi^ 


(319) 


fie^atui  produce  KoVniav  I  tLe  fame  faith  at  uniting  u  the  me4fi/ 
ofyrjo^.  2.  T/;e<^vr/?/<j«  wo/"  L  Paith  in  Chrift  asPrieft,  and 
faiih  in  Chrifl;  as  Prophcr  and  Kirgalfo.  j/^w^yow  talk  <?/Qfaitb 
as  juftifying.ard  as  working  and  lanctifying  J  A  f mall  Alter  uti- 
en,  3.  rrfed/ Myrtical  Kela'.ive  Union  «  r;b«r  vehich  it  ntf  a 
Mo*al  Union  ?  4.  Fdith in  Ckrtjl  at  Ckrijt^  andnot  m  a  Ean- 
fom  finl]^  i^  the  means  of  our  Ji*(liftcation  ;  And  you givi.iU  no- 
tloir.g  like  •*  proof  of  the  contra'^y  rejlrifiio^i. 

In  the  JAfKe  Preface  you  tell  the  v?orld  of  a  threefold  Artifice 
that  rce  ufe  ^  thefrft  «  Q  to  fet  up  a  fccond  Juftificarion  ]  Aftf 
Is  it  the  Name  er  the  Thing  that  you  tnetn  .'  If  the  »ame,  1 .  cite 
the  rvjrds  ^here  jveufe  tha'  Name.  J.  //  it  anf'^er  the  fnl^jiB, 
yoH  may  bear  ^ith  the  name.  If  iMe  the  Thing ,  then  tell  us 
what  Religion  that  it  that  denyeth  I .  a  ftiflifcjition  by  fentence 
at  ffidgemmt.  2.  ^odt  continual  juflifjng  tu  to  the  Death, 
5.  And  his  particular  pardoning  or  ]»jiif)i'<g  m  from  the  guilt 
"  of  renewed  particular  Jins.  4.  And  that  faith  ii  not  onlf  in  the 
firfi  a5if  but  through  all  our  lives  ^  the  means  of  our  fujltjication  ; 
Or ^juflifying  faith  «  more  then  one  infiantaneom  ASl ;  or  a  man 
ceafeth  not  to  have y-*fiifjing  faith  fifttr  theprft  AB  or  moment. 
Tell  us  ^ho  thofe  be^  and  what  Religion  thej  are  of  that  deny  all 
thefe^  that  Chriftiansmay  be  acqttatnted  '^ith  them  ,  ifthej  be 
Worthy  their  acaaaintance. 

Cnrftcond  J^rtlfice «,  [[  to  require  Works  only  as  Gofpel- 
Condition?.]  Anf^v.  iVouldjou  have  us  fay  more  of  them  ^  or 
iefs  ?  /f  lefjy  I  have  /aid  enough  of  it  in  the  feeond  Diffutati' 
on. 

Our  third  *Artifiee  is,  []  To  include  works  in  the  Definition 
of  Juftifying  faith,  making  it  a  receiving  of  Chrift  as  Saviour, 
Lord  and  Law-giver  to  Juftification;  as  alfo  confounding  our 
confummate  Salvation  or  Glorification  with  our  Jutiificati- 
On.]  Anf.C^rof  J  untruths  !  contrary  to  la^ge  and  plaine  expreffi- 
ont  of  my  mind  in  fever  al  Volumes  ( ifjou  mean  me^  as  you  know 
J  have  reafon  to  judge)  i .  lever  took^  Vporki  to  be  a  fruit  of  faith, 
and  no  fart  of  it ,  unlefs  you  take  the  word  Faith  improperly  and 
laxely  -  unlefi  by  £  Works  ]  you  mean  Q  Acts]  ty^nd  you  take 
faith  fer  fucha^ork.  your  ftlf,  that  is,  an  Act.  2.  J  expref- 
ij  difiinguifhed  what  J6U fay  ^ confound  '^Confummate  SanBifica' 

ticn 


C>'5; 


tiift  cr  Q  lor  %  fie  at  ion  ^  andcoytfHntrnatt  Jujitfi^afiort.  B-it  ftt  ds 
lio  in  the  T)e^nuion  incUie  C  jn  snc  CO  Cbrith  Lordfbip , 
tbot*£h  not  Obedience  (  th^ts  orAi  implyed  to  ht  a.  nscel'A^y  con- 
fequent^  )  p  ^  (i^li  f*J  th^t  much  <^f  J'ftr  fufii  cMitrt  ii  jit  to 
(Ofte  *  And  if  joHr  R.eliTi7*t  learhytistJ  jaj^slcat  you  w.ll  he 
beholding  to  C^r'fifor  no  mors  JujiificAUon  ,  fo  doth  n-A  mint. 

And  vthtre^sjoM  c$tti9me  th-it  /^y,  th.i:  all  ottr  (iris  ifepir. 
doned  in  ourfirf}  believing^at  if  I  had  cjutflicntd  Anif^ch  thifif,  I 
mufi  tell  you  that  I  eafilj  grAnt  it^    thit  every  fin  id  then  far- 
given^andfafar  m  thut  Jit^ificaiim  ii  ptrfe^\bnt  wh-it  nAvejou 
yetfiidtoprove^   l.   That -ve  ^re  never y4fl'fitil>jfa:th^   but  in 
that  one  infant.      2.  Thtt  ^e  nted  ro  parttcmUr  Juiiificjti^a 
^rom particteU'^  finstkit  after jhMlb-  cummtteu     g.   Nor  po 
fentential  J HJi if' c -  tlon  at  '^adgemtnr^   rrhich  'J^tr  Burgcfs  rpill 
tell  yotty  is  thechiif.     Ton  uni  others  ufe  to  fay,  thtt^thjtae 
Judgement  ,  t;  bnt   Dedaracive.     "Sut     i.  I:  u  «•  common 
DeclaritiOnj  bttt  a  Dedanttim  by  the  Judge.      2.    And  the 
Sentence  doth  more  then  meerly  decUre  ^  f^r  it  d-th  f.nally  dtciie^ 
ac<\u%t  and  ad]fidge  to  Glory .    3.  Andmethink^i  thiiY>ZQ\iit(\K^ 
[honld  be  no  term   of  T) iminution .,  but  of  Aggravation^  vtith 
thafe  that  /lill  ufe  to  fay  that  ]\ii{\ficil\on  if  a  judiciary  Term. 
(lA Ui iTIoAt  thefe  matters  anung  che friends  ofChf-i/faid  Truth ^ 
fhonld  needfo  many  words. 

Some  more  I  had  to  fay  to  you^  but  joumii  findit  tntict  Pre- 
fa:e  to  thefe  Difputadons.  I  only  ^dd^  that  if  indeed  it  be  true 
rvhich  you  Xtrite  to  that  Honourablt  perfon,  to  vfhom  you  dedtcatt 
your  Labors  J  viz.  That  the  Sub je^  cf  your  1)  ife  our fe  n  fo  ex- 
cellent and  nece(fary  to  be  k^oivn  ;  and  th*t  He  who  is  Ignc- 
rancof  theObjed  and  Office  of  Fai:h.  doch  neither  know 
whac  he  bclievcth  ,  nor  how  he  is  joftified  ;  /  {homli  th-.nk 
it  is  high  time ,  that  you  call  your  Vnderfianding  once  more 
to  an  account.^  and  review  the  Tabrick^  that  y§u  have  built  an 
aqai  juftificans  waf  underfiood^  or  upot  a  i'^idticcitive  qaa:e- 
nuf,  "^here  there  id  Hofuchthiog-.  Andifjouthtnl^me  unfit  ty 
be  hearkned  to  in  th-s^  (  as  betngone  e^  the  men  of  perverlc 
mmds  that  there  you  mention  ,  )  its  more  'Worthy  your  indujiry^ 
to/eek^the  advice  cf  the  liMrntd  Oxford  Divtnet  herein  ,  thtn 

that 


C?io) 


that  they  pjcul^  be [on^ht  to  approve  and  mU'^'ife  fuch  a  Book, »«r 
totitt  world  '■  and  tts  ikc'-i  thai  their  Chiritj  rvilL  provoke  them 
to  htferv'ceableto  j on  in  this ;  tho'igh  1  hear  that  thtir  Difere- 
tioft  forbad  them  tkectker.  For  all  men  are  net [o  t.-fily'^htfi', 
led  into  a  ChiJ}j- Church  ccntet^tion  a^air.J}  tht  Trttth  and, 
(^hurch  of  dirij},  a4  'Dr.  K.  ard  oneortvoConfidsnts^  that 
lixing  in  a  cold  a>id  fleril  (^ouKtry^  are  lef}  fubfiantivt^and  more 
adjtSlive,(h(n  Innocents  and  Independents  ttfe  to  be. 


None's  here  To  fruitfull  as  the  Leaning  Vine  : 

And  what  though  fome  be  drunken  with  the  Wine  ? 

Thcv'l  fight  the  better,    if  they  can  but  hie : 

And  lay  about  them  without  fear  or •  )  But  ftay  1 


See\>phat  Example  ii  !  As  the  name  of  Dr.]\.ay.dth^  remem- 
^^<j«f*  c/ /?Aj  differtatiuncula  (  <««  Appendant  ro  fax  pro  Tri- 
bunali,    that  cotsldhlw^  fide,   fidem  folvere  )  began  to  tice  me 
inteajocsund  vein  ;  fojcurcoKclndi,-jg  Poetry  hadalmojl  tempted 
mtindn  ^p'lfa  iiKitation  to  Poetize,    V(hen  weannejs  made  me 
thinks  of  a  conclnfton.     "Bus  1  had  rather  conclude  wiih  tbiifc' 
riofis  motion  tojea  (that  my  end  may  meet  four  begiining.Jthat 
before   yen  next  nrite  en  this  Subjc^^  you  •ivill  better  conjider 
of  the  tj^/ejiton  that  your  qui  j^liWdcsi-iS  concerneth  :   yindin- 
fleadcf  telliua  us  ,  that  fides  qua  juftificans  rcfpicit  Chriftum 
Salvatorem,  r^<i//>,  fides  qua  juftificans  eft  fides,  as  if  it  were 
juftifying  in  order  of  Nature  before  it  fo*  Faith    :    you  mil  be 
pleafed  to  tell  ui ,  fub  qua  ratione  fides  juftificat  (  vel  fide 
joftificaraur  ?  )  vyhethtr  you  rvilljay ,  that  fides  qua  juftifi- 
canj  ,    juftificat  ,  cr  fides  qua  fides  juftificat  ,  (  vhich  j 
think.yon  difoXVn^)  or  fides  qua  lefpicit,  apprehendit ,  rccipit 
Chriftum,  "^hich  is  all  one,  as  fides  qua  fides,    or  fides  qua 
Inftrumentum  apprehendens ,  which  Mit^pboricAl  cxprtjlon 
[iill  ftgnifeth  no  more  then  [_  qua  credit  in  Chriftum,  cr  qua  fi- 
des? ]  OrvphetheryoM  ^illfiandto  what  you  have  afirmed.chap. 
9'  P^g'  ^7*   f^***  *^'  ^ods  adSgnation  of  it  to  the  oftice,  who 

therefore 


Oil) 


therefore  doth  if,  becaufe  he  wills  it  ;  andto'^hat  youfaU^ 
pag.304.    The  ireercft  formal  reafon  of  a  Believers  Intereft 

to  pardon,  is a  Believers  fulfilling  the  condition.    And 

if  jou  Kvillfiandto  this  that  you  have  f aid-,  and  underhand  that 
the  DcElrine  of  us  ^hcmjcu  affault  k  the  fame  (  more  carefullj 
exprtfftd,  )  be  intreated  then  to  let  your  next  bolt  be  fhot  at  the 
ri^ht  mark^ :  ^hich  is  all  thats  nor*  re<}tiefied  ofyvu^  by 

Your  Cbriftian  Brother  (  whether  you  will  or  no  ) 

Richard  Baxter. 

l>ecemhJi'^, 
1657. 


T  t 


Richard  Baxters 

DISCVSSION 

OF  M' 

fohn  Tombes  his  Friendly,  Acceptable 
ANIMADVERSIONS 

ONHIS 
Aphorifms,  and  other  Writings. 


About  the  Nature  oi  fuflifi- 
cation^^Xid  of  Juftifying  Faith' 


kit 

V  9  ^r 


'5* 


LONDON^ 
Printed  by  R.h^.  for  Nevil  Simmons ,  Book- feller  in  Ke- 
'dtrminfttr^  and  are  to  be  fold  by  him  there ,  and  by  Natba- 
niel  EkinSf  at  the  Gun  in  !p4*/j  Church-yird,  1 658. 


?x 


H  biB 


Mf  n 


o 


vf'IT^n 


C}^i:) 


5;>, 


.>^r^v  pON  reading  ef  the  Poftfcript  in  your 
X,  .^2-.v,i    late  Book,  I  have  fent  you  thefe  Ani- 
fnadveifion«.     You  fay  Aphor.  of  Ju- 
ftification,    pa^.     184.     [_    All    thofe 
Scriptures  i»hi(h  fpe^k^of  jHJiification  04 
done  in  this  life,    /  under fl and  if  f'*fttfi- 
cation  in  Title  of  La^,      So  Rom.^.i. 
and4  2.and  5.9.  fam.  z.tiii'^^CTc'^ 
I  conceiv:  Juftification  ,    being  God« 
Aft,  Rom.  "i.^o.    /?<?>«. 8. 33.    confequent  upon  Faich  ,  and 
calling,  and  importing  a  fentence  oppoficc  to  Condemnation  ; 
^<»w.8.50,3  3,^4.  and  5.1.  terminated  on  particular  perfons, 
Rom.  4.2,3.    /?ow.8.30.     it  muft  be  more  then  the  Vertual 
Juftification  in  Law-Title  ;  which  is  only  an  ad  of  God  prc- 
fcriblng  or  proraifig  a  way  of  Juftification,  not  the  fentence 
ic  felf,  and  is  general,  and  indeterminate  to  particular  perfons, 
-and  is  performed  before  the  perfon  juftified  believes :  Yea  is 
the  fame,  though  none  were  adually  juftified  ;  and  therefore 
inmyapprchenfion,  that  Ad  of  Gods  Covenanting  or  pro- 
raifing,  in   which  I  conceive  you  place  the  Juftification  by 
Law-Title.    Thef.i%,   Is  not  the  Juftification  by  faith  meant, 
-Rom.'^.\.(^c. 

Befides,  to  be  juftified  notes  a  Paflion ,  which  prefuppofeth 
anAdion^  an  Ad Tranfient,  not  Immanent;  or  only  Gods 
purpofe  to  jaftifie  :  nor  can  it  be  Gods  Promife  toju^ifie; 

Tc3  Fob 


(3^*^) 


■for  the  A(fl,  though  it  be  Tranfient,  yet  it  is  only  a  Declarati- 
on what  he  v;iH  do;  hispromifeto  juftifie  upon  condition,  is 
not  Juflifyiig,  and  therefore  a  man  is  not  by  the  Covenant, 
w-ihout  a  further  Ad,  Denominated  Juftificd,  though  he  be 
made  juftifyable  by  it.  I  conceive  Juftification  is  a  Court  term, 
Importing  an  AA  of  God  as  Judge,  whereas  his  promifing  is 
not  his  Act  as  Judg3,but  ReEior,tbef.^2.  you  mcnt:-on  the  An- 
gtls  judging  us  Righteous,    and  Rejoycing  therein ;  which 
whence  it  fliould  be, but  by  a  fentencc  pafTed  in  Heaven.I  know 
not     Conftitutive  Juftification,  different  from  Declarative  by 
fentence,  I  do  not  find  cxpreffed  under  the  term  [_}uflificAtion\ 
It  would  be  confidered  whether  any  other  A(5lbefides  the  fen- 
tence, doth  make  a  man  juft,but  giving  of  faithj  notwithftand- 
iogChrifts  Death.and  the  conditional  Covenant  before  faiths 
perfon  is  only  juftifyable  ;  ConditionulU  nihil  fonit  in  ejfe.  A  per- 
fon  is  upon  giving  ofFaithjuftified;  but  not  by  giving  of  faith 
Cthats  ana^  ofSan(3ificacion)but  by  a  fentence  ofijodjThtf. 
5  9.  You  make  juftification  a  continued  adjnow  itbeinga  tran- 
iient  ad,I  fappofe  it  may  not  be  well  called  a  continued  Ad, 
which  imports  a  fucceffive  motion  between  the  ttrm'mtu  a  qtto^ 
and  ternfi)iH6Ai^uemi  whereas  the  ad,whethcr  by  fentence,oc 
Covenantjis  not  fuch  a  Motion.    Its  not  to  be  denyed,that  the 
Benefit  and  Vertue  of  it  if  continued,  but  I  think  not  the  Ad. 
If  it  be  dot fentel,  bttC  fepe^ytt  it  Qiould  be  ratbf  r  cilkd  Atltu 
RenovAtits.RepetitwJteratfu^lhtn  continued -I  iocHriC  tO  think 
there  is  but  one  Juftification  of  a  perfoflinthislife^  thoogh 
fftere  be  frequent  remiffions  of  fin.  Of  this  you  may  Confidcr. 
\tnht^i\nX.9Everlajiiy}aReJ}^pag.ii.  Doubtlefs  the  Gdi^ 

pel  takes  faith  for  our  obedience  to  All  Gofpel  Precepts.  Be- 
lieving doth  not  produce  fubjediontoChtiftas  KFng,  as  a  fi- 
nite, but  contains  it  as  an  fiflfential  part ,  e^r.  Aphor.  p.  25.5. 
Faith  doth  as  Really  and  Immediately  Receive  Chrift  as  King 
fasSaviour^OT  Prieft)  and  foJuftifie,7'*f/:<55.  Scripture  doih 
rtot  take  the  wdrd  [  F^tiih  ]  for  any  one  fingle  Ad  ,•  nor  yet 
for  various  Ads  of  one  only  faculty  ^  but  for  a  compleat  en- 
fire  motion  of  tlJc  whole  foul  to  Chfift  its  Object,  Tbef.^7. 
It  is  the  Act  of  faith  which  juftifies  itien  ac  Age ,  and  AOt  the 
Habir, 

Againft 


Againft  this  I  object ;  i .  F^ith  V^orketh  hj  Love,  Gal.  j. 
16.  if  one  bean  cflential  part  of  the  other,  and  faith  acorn - 
pJtAt  entire  motion  of  the  foul,then  when  it  is  faid,Faith  work- 
eth  by  Love,  it  might  be  faid,it  worketh  by  Faith. 

2.  Gofpcl  PrcceptJ  are  many,  if  not  all ,  the  fame  with  the 
Moral  Law ;  if  Juftificd  then  by  obedience  to  them,  are  we  not 
juftificd  by  the  works  of  the  Law  ?  You  conceive  the  Juftifi- 
cation,  fMm.z.  to  be  by  works  in  a  proper  fence  ,  aad  that  be- 
fore God  ^  and/?4/(?4^/act  wasaworkof  Hofpitalicy,z'rr,25. 
commandedin  the  Law;  and  ^hr^himt  work  was  a  facr»rt- 
cingjor  offering  a  work  of  the  Ceremonial  La  v,  ver.zi. 

3.  Repentance  is  obedience  to  one  Gofpel  Precept,  yet 
Faith  and  Repentance  arcdiftingui(bed,/^4r. 1. 15. 6, 1.  Lovf^ 
Faith^  Hope^  are  three^  l  Cor.  13.13.    I  Ttm.  15.2  Thef.  1.5. 

faith  and  Lovchavc  different  Ob  ject5,Co/.  1. 4 -"P^'/S-  i  7^*"/- 
I .  ? .  Therefore  not  the  fame  j  nor  one  an  ElTential  part  of  the 
other. 

4.  Obedience  is  a  fiijn  to  prove  faith, 74W. 2. 1 8.  and  there- 
fore not  an  Effentia!  parr. 

5.  If  Faith  include  obedknce  to  all  Gofpel  Precepts  as  an 
Eifential  part,then  actual  faith  includes  actual  obedience  to  all 
Gofpel  Preccprs  as  an  effcnrial  partjand  if  the  Ace  of  faith  Ju- 
.ftific  men  at  Age,  not  the  Hibit ;,  and  receiving  Chrift  as  King, 
as  immediatly  J  uftific,  as  believing  in  Chrift  as  Saviour,  then  a 
per  fon  of  Age  is  notjuftified  without  actual  obedience  to  all 
Gofpel  Precepts,  and  this  may  be  not  till  Dea:h  ^if  the  n  ,  and 
fo,  no  Jufti^cation  in  this  Life. 

6.1f  Faith  juftifie  as  immediatly  by  receiving  Chrift  as  King, 
as  by  receiving  him  as  Saviour ,  then  it  juftifies  by  receiving 
Chrift  as  Judge,  A^atth.1%,^4.-  as  Law-g<ver,  Avenger  of  his 
enemies,  and  fo  a  man  is  jaftified  By  receiving  ChriAs  Judging, 
Punifhing,  Condemning,  Commanding,  Avenging,  as  well  a( 
favingby  his  Death  ;  which  is  contrary  to  ^ew. 5. 25.  &  5.9 

7.  The  Scripture  makes  the  object  of  jaftifying  faith  CHrills 
Death, Refurtection,  Blood,  i^ow. 5.1^.  &100.  C7<s/.2. 20,21. 
Nowhere  Thrifts  dominion. £r^ff.  Subjection  to  Chrift  as  king 
isnotaneffi^ncialpart. 

8.  The  object  of  Faith  is  nowhere  made  to  be  a  Gofpei 

PfQcepr,, . 


(3i8) 


Precept,  fuch  as  forgiving  others,  ufing  Sacraments, (^^  nor 
Chrift  as  commanding  ;  but  the  Declaration  of  the  Accom- 
plilhrnentsofChriftjandchecounfelofGodiohim,  i  CorA$, 
i.t^c.  Kortj.i  16,17.  C?^/.3.8.  Er£o  Obedience  i*  not  an  Ef- 
fcntial  part 

9.  If  it  bean  efTrnrial  part,  then  cither  Genu?  or  DifTe- 
rence ;  for  no  other  EiTential  parts  belong  to  a  quality  or  Afti- 
on  :  not  the  Gcnus,that's  Arfent.  y^ph.  ^.254.  274.  when  the 
objed  is  a  Propoficion  :  when  it  is  an  Incomplex  term,  Truft 
is  the  Genus :  not  che  Difference,  thats  chiefly  taken  from  the 
objed.  Ktker./yfi,  Legic.  I.  i  .ftR^i.c.  2.  cart.  Dtfin.  Accid, 
5 . 7.  Obedience  may  make  known  Fa  th  as  a  fign,  but  not  as  a 
part,  itsatleaftinorder  of  Nature  after  ^  the  caufe  is  afore 
theeffLd:  the  Antecedent  before  the  Confequent ;  and  faith 
is  fuch,  Heb.w.'i.&c. 

10.  If  Faith  be  a  compieat  entire  motion  of  the  whole  foul 
to  Chrift,  then  it  fhould  be  Love,  Joy,  Hope,  Underftanding, 
Will,  Memory,  Fear ;  But  this  is  not  to  be  faid.  Ergo. 

Itisalleadgcd,  i.  Faith  muft  be  the  Aft  of  the  whole  foul; 
elfe  part  (hould  receive  him,  part  nor. 

AnfVc.  Faith  is  cxprefTed  by  the  Metaphor  of  Receiving, 
foh.i.ii.Col.  1.6.  And  he  is  Received  by  the  Receiving  of  his 
Word,  fob.  1 2.^2.  I  7";;??/ 2. 1 3.  which  is  Received  by  Aflent. 
2.  The  whole  foul  receives  Chrift,  though  by  other  Graces  be- 
fides  faith. 

2.  Af}j2,^y.  Rom.io.io,  A nfp>. The tCTm[fVhc/e 2 notes 
not  every  inward  faculty  ;  but  (  as  after)  fincerely , not  feign - 
cdly,  as  Simon  Alagpu.  So  llljrktu. 

3.  Faith  is  called  Obeying  the  Cofpel,/?*w.  J 0.1 6-  i /**?. 
1.22.^4.77.  ■2.Thtf,\^*GaL'^.\.&  %.'j.Heb.%.9*  Butthe 
Gofpel  commandeth  All  thus  to  obey  Chrift  as  Lord,  forgive 
others,love  his  people,  bear  what  fuffcrings  arc  Impofed,  dili- 
gently ufc  his  Means  and  Ordinances.confefting^bewailing  lins, 
praying  for  pardon  fincerely  and  to  the  end . 

y^w/ft*.  Hf^.5.9.  fpeaks  of  obeyng  Chrift,but  doth  not  call 
faith  obeying  Chrift  :  but  be  it  granted.Faith  is  called  obeyinjg 
of  Chrift]  or  the  Gofpel ;  doth  it  follow  that  it  is  obedience  in 
doing  thole  named  Ads }  Ic  may  be  obedience  by  AfTent  to 

the 


the  Dodlrinc  of  Chrift,  that  he  is  the  AUffmh^^x^d,  for  fins, 
&c.  commanded  i  Cor.  15.3.  i  J^lo.  3.  23.  which  the  terras 
?7t'/-?i<3K/  and  vsraii^fiv  do  rather  Import,  then  the  other  Ads 
mentioned.  The  Gofpel  and  Truth  are  reftrained  to  the  Doc- 
trine of  Chrifts  coming,  dying,c^<:,  nowhere  applyed,  that  I 
know,  to  the  Precepts  of  forgiving  others ,fuffcrirg  death,  re- 
ceiving the  Lords  Supper,(^f . 

4.  The  fulfilhng  the  condition  of  the  new  Covenant  is  called 
faithjG'rf/.s.  1 2,2^,25. 

t^nfVi^er.  Neither  of  thefc  places  make  faith  the  fulfilling 
of  the  Condition  of  the  New  Covenant,  nor  any  place  elfe. 
In  ^<?/.  3. 12.  Its  [aid, the  Law,tfaatis  the  Covenant  of  the  Law, 
is  not  of  Faith.».f.doth  not  alfign  Life  to  Faith  in  Chrift. Faith 
Ca/.-^,  23,  25.  is  put  ,  faith  Pi/cat.  for  the  lime  of  the 
^^ofpel,  or  Chrift,  fay  others,  or  the  Dodrir.e  of  Faith.  By 
Faith  only  the  condicionof  the  Covenant  conccrnirg  Juftifi- 
cation  in  thislifeis  fulfilled,  not  concerning  every  Benefit  of 
the  new  Covenant.  Repentance  is  the  condition  of  Rtmifli- 
on  of  (ins;  forgiving  others,doing  good  to  tlie  Saints,  of  enter- 
ing into  Life. 

5.  The  Gofpel  reveals  not  Chrifts  ofFces  as  feparite.  Er^o. 
They  mnft  be  fo  believed. 

Anfiv.  The  conclufion  is  granted  ,  but  proves  not  faith  to 
juftifie  in  receiving  (,  hrift  as  KinS. 

6.  It  offers  Chrilt  as  King,and  fo  raull  be  received.  Anfwer 
the  fame. 

7. Scripture  nowhere  tieth  juftificstion  to  the  receit  of  him  as 
prieflonly.  ^r.The  contrary  is  proved  from  iJfw. 3. 25  &  5.9. 

8.  Commonly  Chrift  is  called  our  Lord  and  Saviour. /^w/n^. 
True ;  But  we  are  juftified  by  his  blood. 

9.  If  we  receive  him  not  as  a  King,  then  not  as  an  entire 
Saviour.  y^^/rt-.Truej  Yet  Juftificationisby  bisdeath,2  Ccr. 
5.2I.(?.^/.2.2I.  .^om-5  25  and  59. 

I  o.  Chrift  is  not  received  truly ,if  not  entirely  as  Kinj^.  ^«- 
/w.True^But  this  proves  not  that  obedience  is  an  effential  part 
of  faith  ;  orthat  fubjcdion  to  Chrift  as  King,  juftifies  as  ira- 
mediatety^as  receiving  him  as  Saviour. 

II.  The  exalting  of  his  proper  Kingly  office,  is  a  Principal 
End  of  Chrifts  dy\Dg.Tjal.i.Rcm.\^.9' 

Uu  ^tf^- 


y?H/ir.1rtUe  •,  fetitVcfollDivsnor  that  tithcr  Obedience  is 
in  ElTentUl  f^'a'rt  hi  faith  ,  Xfv  fobjeftion  to  C^tift  as  King 
JuftifTeth  as  irtiftit'diaVcly   as  teeeivcng  him  as    Saviour  or 

iPfifft. 

Tefirs  in  r*f  T^Uth         I.     T, 


Sfr, 
■jTstobeconfidcred,  i.  Whether  tbefe  words  anfwer  to  Va- 
"^ledict. orat  atB.pag'  ipi.  L  Nothing  but  the  fit'^fa^ion  of 
Chrifty  u  thdt  which  our  Divines  calltke  matter  of  oar  fufiifiea- 
tion^er  the  Right eoufnefs  which  "^e  mufl  ple^dto  ^c^nit  U4  in 
Judgement/^  And  it  is  fold /Joiw. 3. 25  through  faith  in  his 
Blood,  and /Ijjw.  5.9.  by  his  Blood,  Do  not  prove  Chnfls 
Death  either  the  fole  or  chief  Object  of  faith  as  Juftifying^  and 
how  this  ftands  with  Aphorifna  of  Juftification,  Thef.66.  and 
its  Explication. 

2.  Whether  the  words,  Luk^\t.  14.  import  not  a  dif- 
daiming  or  denial  of  a  Title  to  judge  ,  and  fo  your  anfwcr 
be  not  infufficient,  p^o^.  7,y6.  which  feeras  to  fuppofe  a 
Title,and  only  a  Sufpenlion  of  Exercife  in  that  ftite  of  Humi- 
liation. 

5.  Whether  if  Magiftrates  be  Officers  of  Chrift  as  King, 
by  Office  they  be  no:  in  his  Kingdom,  and  fo  Infidel  Magi- 
ftrates in  Chrifts  Kingdom,contrary  to  CoLi .14. 

4.  If  it  be  maintained,  Thtt  Chri(l  died  for  evety  Child  of 
Adam  condiiionallj^  Ic  would  be  well  proved  fromScriptUre, 
that  the  procuring  of  fuch  a  conditional  Law  or  Covenant^ 
was  the  End  or  Ened  of  Chrifts  death  •,  and  whether  the  fo 
Interpreting  Texts  that  fpeak  of  his  dying  for  all,  will  nor 
fervc  for  Evafions  to  put  by  the  Arguments  drawn  from  ihcm 
to  prove  Chrifts  Satisfaftion  aad  Merit,  proper  to  the  Eleft. 
For  if  they  may  be  Interpreted  fo,  He  died  to  procure  the  conditi' 
onal  Covenant  for  every  one^xhxi  may  be  alledged  juftlyjthcnyou 
can  prove  no  more  thence,  forthat  isthefenfc;  and  then  we 
cannot  prove  thence,  he  died  ^co/joy'Frt?,  Otitis  a  matter  of 
mach  momenc,and  needs  great  Circumfpe^ioa.  Toftrs. 

Sir 


Shf 

OEfidcs  what  hath  been  formerly  fuggcftcd  to  you,  chcfe 
-■^  words  in  your  Scripture  proofs,  ^-^^.323.  J!r?d  vhere  he 
nextfkith^  that  in  the  aged  fever  al  dijf<>fitioKS  are  required  to  jit 
a  man  to  receive  f;irdon^{and [0  j»fiification)\\z  Catholike  faith ^ 
hope  offardoti^feAr  ofpunip}mentygriefforft}i,a  furpft  agai»(i  fin- 
ing hereafter^  axd  a  pftrpofe  cfa  new  life^all  which  difpofe  the  de- 
ceiver  ;  nnd  I  agree-  to  him^  though  all  do  riot  ]  are  fb  like  the 
Dodrine  of  the  Trent  Council.  U{{.6.c.6.  that  it  will  be 
cxpcded  you  declare ,  whether  by  avowing  that  fpeech  of 
Dr.  f^ard,  you  do  not  join  with  the  Papifts,  contrary  to  Bi- 
fhop  Z)(?W«<i»«of  JuRification. /.  O.c.j.^.i.zMr.  ^emblevin- 
diQ.fidii.^.z.c.i, 

And  when  you  make  Juftification  a  concirrued  Ad  upon 
condition  of  obedietice,  its  to  be  confiJered  how  you  will 
avfi(id  Tompfons  opinion  of  the  irtercifion  of  Juftification, 
upon  the  committing  of  a  fin  that  wafts  the  confcience, refuted 
by  Dt,Roh.Ahbot.  but  vented  after  by  Moutague  in  his  appeal, 
and  oppofed  by  Dr.  Prefion^  and  others. 

As  for  justification  by  Law-Title,  by  the  Covenant  upon 
adual  Believing,  without  any  other  ad  of  God,  confequenc 
on  Faith  ;  if  it  were  fo ;  i .  Then  it  Ihould  be  by  neceffary 
Refulcancy ;  But  Juftification  is  an  Ad  of  WiiUand  no  ad  of 
Will  is  by  neceffary  Refultarcy. 

2.  If  the  Covenant  juftifie  without  any  other  Ad  of  God, 
then  it  Adops,  GIorifies,Sanctifics,  ^r. without  any  other  Act, 
which  is  not  to  be  faid.  The  rea(on"of  the  Sequel  is,  becaufc 
the  Covenant  of  it  felfdothinthc  fame  manner  produce  the 
one  as  well  as  the  other. 

3'  The  Juftification  of  the  Covenant  is  only  conditional, 
therefore  not  Actual ;  Actual  Juftification  is  not  tjU  Faith  be 
put :  and  then  Pofita  comlittone  ,  it  is  Actual  -  A  conditional , 
is  only  a  poffible  Juftification  ;  its  only  /«  foter.tia ,  till  the 
Condition  be  in  act ;  Now  the  Covenant  doth  only  afTure 
it  on  condition ,  asafuturething.noc  therefore  as  actual,  or 
prcfent.  Uu  2  4.  The 


(?30 

4  TheCovenantisan  Accpaft,r*M.2.  Gal. ^.7,$.  fonot 
Gontinned  i  and  confeqaently,  the  Juft  fict'ion  barely  by  it, 
without  any  other  Ace,  muft  be  paft  long  (ince,  anJ  not  conti- 
n«ed  ;  andiheneitherjuftification  Actual,  and  inpurpopfe; 
or  virtual ,  will  be  confounded,  or  an  efTecc  (hall  be  continued, 
without  the  caufe. 

?4».i7,  1 65 1.  '  Tcurs. 
M". 

Reverend  Sir, 

I.  AM  more  thanktull  to  you  for  thefefree,  candid,  rational ' 
Animadverfions,  thenlcannowexprefstoyou  :  yet  being 
ftill  conHrained  to  difTent  from  you,by  the  evidence  of  Truth, 
I  give  you  thcfe  Ilcafons  of  my  diffenc. 

i.Firft,  You  think  that  jhe  Serif  tares  ci^ed^  Are  not  to  be  in* 

ttpettdof  Jf*?ificationin  Title  of  L  iw^  becatifethis  ii  only  an 

Acl  of  (jodprefcribing  or  promlfing  a  way  of  JujIifcMion  ;  not 

thtfentence  itfelf-^  and  is  general,  and  lnieiermin.ne  to  purticH- 

Ur  perfons,  &c.  ]  Tor  whKh  I  anfwer.  i  .That  I  am  paft  doubt 

that  you  build  all  this  on  a  great  miftake  about  the  nature  of 

Gods  Law  or  Covcnant,&  Promire,&  the  moral  aftion  thereof. 

For  you  niuft  know  that  this  Piomife  of  God,    i.  is  not  a 

bare  A^ertio  expUcanj  de  fnturo  anintHm  ejui  nunc  efi  ;   ^  as 

Grotim  fpeaks ;  )    Nor  yec  that  which  he  calleth  PolHcitatio, 

CHtn  voluntas  feipfeim  pro  fnturo  tempore  determinate  camjiano 

fuficiiute  ad  jit^icandiMperfeverandi  necejjitatem.     But  it  is 

TerfeB*  "Tromffjio  ,     ubi  ad  determinatio>iem  talem  accedit 

fignum  volendijsit  proprium  alteri  conferre,    e^UA  fimiltm  habet 

effetlum  <\Hxleni  alienatiy  Domin.i.    Ejl  enim  ant  via  ad  alitnA- 

tton£m  rei^  aut  alien atio  partictiU  cujufdam  nojira  libertatts. 

SLcVtd,  ultra  grot.dejure  Belli  li.zc. II. §.2. ';,^. 

2.  This  Promife  or  Covenant  of  God,is  alfo  his  Teflament : 
and  who  knoweth  not  that  a  Teftament  is  an  I'nJirBment  of 
proper  Donatio^Ji  and  not  only  a  Predi5lion  ?  3.  Moreover 
this  fame  which  in  one  refpcd  is  a  Covenant  and  Promi??,  aud 
!nanotheraTcftaracnt,is  alfo  truly'part  of  Gods  Law,  even 
the  New  confiitmioH  of  Chrift,  the  Law-giver  and  King.  Buc 
mdoubnedly  a  Law  which  conferrcth  Right  cither  abfolutely 


C  335) 


or  conditionally,  is  the  true  and  proper  Inftraraent  of  that 
Effect,  and  not  only  [  the  frefenting  or prom'tftHg  a  wjiy  thereto  ] 
The  proper  Efted  ©r  Product  of  every  Law,  is  DebitHnt  all- 
quod;    Et  de  hoc  debito  cL:termln4re  \%\is  proper  Ad.     Now 
therefore  this  Promife  being  part  of  Chrifts  Law,  dorhdettr- 
mine  of  and  confer  on  us ,  the  Debitum,  or  Right  to  fententi- 
al  Juftification,  having  firft  given  us  an  Intcreft  in  Cbrift,  and 
fo  to  the  Benefit  of  his  fatisfaction  ;  and  this  is  fufttficatio 
conftittiHVA.     You  know  a  Deed  of  Gift  (  though  but  con- 
ditional j  is  a  moft  proper  Inftrumcnt  of  conferring  the  Bene- 
fits therein  contained.     And  is  not  the  Promife  undoubtedly 
Gods  Deed  of  Gift  ?  And  doth  he  net  thereby  make  over,  as 
it  were  under  his  hand,  the  Lord  Jefus,  and  all  his  Benefits  to 
them  that  will  receive  him?   So  that  when  you  fay,  that[[/7fx 
Promife  to  jfi/ii^euf  3ft  condltiony  tj  not  ufiifjing  3    You  may 
fee  it  is  Otherwise  by  all  the  forementioned  confiderations  of 
the  nature  of  the  Promife.   You  may  as  well  fay,  a  Teflament^ 
or  deed  of  Gift  conditional^  doth  not  give,  or  z  La"^  doth  not 
confer  Right  ani  Title.     And  in  thefc  Relative  benefits,  to 
give  Right  to  the  thing,    and  to  give  the  thing  it  felf,  or  right 
in  it,    is  all  one  :  (  ftill  allowing  the  diftance  of  time  limited 
for  both  in  the  Inftrumcnt  )  It  is  all  one  to  give  full  right  to 
fon-(hip,   and  to  make  one  a  Son  :  or  at  leaft  they  areinfepa- 
rible.     Yea,  f  which  weigheth  moft  of  all  with  me  ^  it  being 
the  proper  work  of  Gods  Laws  to ^i:'^ '!)««?/}  of,  or  Right 
to'Benefiti,  it  cannot  be  any  other  way  accomplifhed  that  is 
within  our  Knowledge  (^  I  think  )   For  Decree,  Parpofe^  and' 
lb  Prcdellination  cannot  do  it,  they  being  Determinations  \de 
eventH  ^  and  not  dedebito,  asfuch:   And  the  fententialdecla- 
r<i/»t7wprefuppofeth  thisl)^^!^^^,    or  trtte  R'ghteoufnefi,  an 
therefore  doth  not  give  it.    No  wonder  therefore  while  you 
deny  this  Legal,  Teftamentary,   Moral  Donation,   that  yoa 
are  forced  alfo  to  deny  lufiification  con(litutive\  (  but  very 
inconveniently  andunfafely.)  By  what  way  doth  God  r,ivea 
father  Authority  over  his  Children,  and  a  Husband  over  his 
Wife,  and  a  Magiftrate  over  the  people,  and  a  Minift^r  over 
the  Church  or  Flock,  but  only  by  this  Moral,  legalAdion? 
Andeven  fo  doth  he  give  Power  to  them  that  receive  him,  ro 

U  u  3  \       becora  ^ 


(3H) 


become  bis  Son*.  And  icisthe  fame  In(!fument  which  pcr^ 
formcththis,  which  is  called  a  Promire,  Covcnant,TeftanTent» 
Dirpofition  or  Law  ;  the  name  being  raken  from  different  rc- 
fpeds  or  accidental  confiderations. 

Again,  If  tie  word  of  Chrift  do  jjdge  us,  then  that  word 
doth  juftifie  and  condemn  •"  (  For  judging  in  general  con- 
tainclh  thcfc  fpecui  Adions.  )  But  the  word  doth  judge  us  , 
(  and  fliall  do  at  the  la^l  day.  )  therefore  the  word  doth  j'ufti- 
fic  and  condemn. 

Again  :  It  is  a  Rule  in  the  Civil  Law  (as  V/pUn  )  thit  Bj 
the  (ame  tra)  as  Att  Obligation  is  induced  or  caufsd ,  it  ntufl  be  rt' 
moved  or  dejtroyed :  But  by  the  curfe  of  the  Law,  or  the 
Threatningof  Pcnaity.was  our  obligation  to  punifliment,  and 
condemnation  induced  or  caufed  :     therefore  by  the  way  of 
Law  difTolving  that  caufe,  mu^  it  be  taken  off     Now  as  Rea- 
tta  f/  obligatio  ad  Pcenam^  fo  pardon  is  the  diflblving  of  that 
obligation f  ordifchargc  from  it;  (Fenia   ctr  Poena  funt  ad- 
verfa :   )   And  therefore  the  Law  of  Chrift,  or  this  his  Pro- 
inifc  or  Grant,  is  the  Inflrument  of  Pardoning.     And  mc- 
tbirks,  when  you  are  convinced ,  that  God  pardoneth  by 
Law  or  moral  Adion ,  you  (hould  eafily  yield,  that  in  the 
like  way  he  jt^/lifieth.    For  if  you  be  not  of  the  Judgement, 
that  R.miffion  and  Juftification  arc  all  one:  yet  youmuft 
reeds  yield,  that  they  are  of  fo  near  a  nature,  that  the  dif- 
ference is  exceeding  fmali,  and  rather  notional  and  refpec- 
tive,    then  real.    I  might  to  thefe  Arguments  add  fomewhac 
from  the  IlTue,  and  different  tendency  of  this  my  opinion 
and  the  contrary.     As  that  this  doth  give  Gods  Laws  their 
honor  and  dignity,  by  afcribing  to  them  that  higher  and  more 
noble  and  cffeftive  Action;  which  the  contrary  opinion  de- 
nying it,  doth  very  injurioDdy  debafe  the  Scriptures  or  Laws 
of  God.     Alfo  that  this  opinion  is  the  only  expedient  left, 
( that  I  can  find  )  to  avoid  the  Antinomian  fancy  of  an  Eter- 
oal  JuftiHcation,  which  all  they  muft  affert,  that  fay  it  is  an 
Immanent  Act    (  which  you  juftly  and  truly  deny. )  For 
your  way  lying  in  the  other  extream,    i.  Overthroweth  all 
eonftitutive  Ju^ification '^  which  is  not  to  be  born.  C  Whether 
AUTardon  by  the  Covenant,  I  yet  know  not  your  mind^ 

2.  And 


(51^) 


2.  And  it  Intepretcth  al!  Scriptures  (  that  fpeak  ofa  Jufli- 
fjcation  in  this  life  ^  of  a  ftrangc  feigned  Juftification,  which 
for  ought  I  find  hath  no  ground  in  Scriprureat  all  ^  and  is 
wholly  alicnc  to  our  condition  ;  ai.d  at  kart  utterly  un- 
known to  us,  ifnot  knowntobeantrue.     What  doth  it  con- 
cern a  finner  to  be  juftified  or  condemned  now  before  a  Court 
of  Angels,  where  he  is  not  prefent,noT  knows  any  thing  of  it  ? 
nor  do  we  know  what  Angels  hive  to  do  infuch  a  bulineft. 
And  what  Tranficnt  Aft  IS  it  that  God  then  and  there  puts 
forth  or  performeth  ?  Can  you  cell?  or  doth  Scripture  tell 
you?  God  fpeaketh  not  to  Angels  by  voyce.  Ifyou  think  (as 
the  Schoolmen,  fome  j  thut  they  fee  our  Juftification.  as  other 
things  in  the  face  of  God ;  then  it  is  no   i  ranfient  A&.  Eifc 
why  may  not  c^iey  fee  it  in  it  feff  ?  And  then  cither  our  Juftifi. 
cation  is  Gods  EHence^and  they  fee  it  in  him  as  his  Eternal  Be- 
ing, or  elfe  God  muft  be  mutable,  as  having  fomething  to  be 
feeninhim  demvo^  which  was  not  in  him  from  Eternity.  If 
you  fay  that  this  Tranfient  Ad  is  Gods  Illuminating  the  An- 
geiicai  underftanding  to  know  us  to  be  juftified  ;  then  this  fup- 
pofeth  that  we  arc  juftified  already  by  fomc  former  A<^(  which 
can  be  nothing  that  I  know  but  the  moral  Act  of  his  Lawcs :  ) 
.  For  their  knowing  us  to  be  juftified  is  not  a  juftifying  us ,  but 
prefuppofeth  us  to  be  what  they  know  us  to  be.    I  can  think 
of  nothing  elfe  that  you  can  fay,  except  this ,   that  Chrift  as 
man  may  Vocally  (or  by  fome  equivalent  Tranfient  Act)  pro- 
nounce us  Juftified,  as  he  will  do  at  Judgement.  But  i.  this  is 
without  Scripture,  a.  and  it  is  God  that  juftifieth.  3 .  And  then 
how  were  all  the  faithful  juftified  before  Chrifts  Incarnation 
and  Afcenfion  ?  Or  do  you  think  none  were  juftified  before  ? 
But  I  will  return  to  your  Exceptions. 
You  fay,  [[  This  m  but  Virtml  fitfi'ficathn  ]  which  is  in  Law 
Title.   v4«/ir.  I .  It  is  tyf^M^l Con^itutive  fff[iifkAtio»,dnd  not 
Virtual  only.   2. But  it  is  indeed  but  Virtual  [enttntUl  juftifica- 
tion.   But  yet  itisofthehigheft  kind  of  Virtuaiity.     Ji  is 
that  which  siakes  us  reEtot  in  (7Mr»4,f  which  I  take  to  be  the  na-. 
ture  of  our  Juftification  in  this  life.)  And  taken  </»v//w,it  feem- 
eth  more  excellent  iafome  refpeA,  then  the  fentence  or  dcda* 
ration  it  felf  ^  for  be  that  by  Purcbafe  6rft,and  Pardon  (writ- 
ten ) 


C\\^) 


xtVL  )  afccr,maketh  Offenders  juft  in  Law,)  i e  (  mn  ob'igatos 
'adpcen^itn  ,)  feemcth  to  do  more  for  them  bv  that  act  then 
after  by  pronouncing  them  juft.  Though  yet  this  laft  I  know 
is  the moft  perfect  juft  fication,takenc<?«j««^i»»  with  the  reft, 
as  the  end  to  which  they  tend  ,  and  as  that  which  giveth  them 
their  full  effect. 

Your  next  Objection  is,  that  thisGofpel  JuftificationX  »^ 
general  andindettrminate  to  f  Articular  pirjonj  ^  Anfwer.It  can- 
not be  more  certain  or  effectual.  For  when  it  is  to  all,  no  man 
hath  reafon  to  think  himfelf  excepted  (  who  excludes  not 
hirafelf  by  non- performance  of  the  conditions.  )  Every  par- 
ticular man  is  comprized  in  All.  And  for  the  determination, 
the  Defcriptien  of  the  perfon  is  as  certain  a  way  as  the  naming 
of  him.  To  give  Chrift  and  his  Righteoufnefs  to  All  that 
will  receive  him,  is  as  effectual  a  determinate  Gift  to  each 
particular  Receiver,  as  to  give  him  to  Peter,  Taul,  John  by 
name.  If  a  Pardon  be  proclaimed,  or  given  in  the  Laws,  to 
all  Offenders  that  perform  fuch  a  condition;  is  it  not  as  ef- 
fectual to  each  perfon,  as  if  he  were  named  ?  If  a  Father  be- 
queath fuch  Lands  or  Monies  to  all  his  Children  (or  a  man 
to  all  the  poor  in  the  town)  on  condition  that  they  come  by 
fuch  a  day  to  fuch  a  place,  and  fignifie  their  acceptance  and 
gratitude  :  is  not  this  as  fure  and  good,  as  if  they  were  all 
named  ? 

Next,  You  objeft,  [  Thu  U  fer formed^  before  the  perfon 
jftjltfied  believts,  ]  Anfwer.  I  have  faid  enough  to  you  of 
this  already.  CofBapt.  ^<i^.ioo.  )  I  add  this  much  :  you 
muft  diftinguilh  between  the  Phyfical  aft  of  making  this  Law, 
Promifc,  Covenant,  Grant  or  Teftament :  and  the  Moral 
Agency  of  this  Law,  Grant  or  Teftament  once  made.  The 
former  wai  before  we  Believed  :  but  the  later  was  not  (  pro- 
perly and  fully  )  till  after.  Do  not  all  Philofophcrs  and  Di- 
vines in  the  world  that  .meddle  with  it,  tell  you  that  this  is 
ufual  with  moral  caufes,  thatthcy  may  have  all  their  abfoliite 
Entity  and  vim  agendi^\or\^  before  they  produe  their  effedts  ? 
and  may  be  AEiu  primo,  et/i  nen  fecundo  eff'e^l/tm  ^roducente,  in 
being  long  before.  The  Law  that  determineth  of  your  right 
to  your  Poffeflion,  or  that  doth  give  a  Reward  to  every  man 

that 


C3?7) 


tthac  killechawildhurtfull  bead,  orthac  condemnech  every 
manthacmurdcreth  orcommitteth  Felony,  &c.  was  in  Be- 
ing before  thofe  perfons  were  born  perhaps :  And  yet  it  did 
not  W  <«£rr/ ;  it  <lid  not  Pr<«!»i4rr,  F«m>r,  Pr<<c"i/>f r^,  ^c.  as 
to  this  man  before.  A  pardon  from  a  Prince  to  a  fraytor,  on 
condition,  doth  not  perform  the  moral  act  of  his  difcharge^till 
he  perform  the  condition,  though  it  were  in  being  before. 
The  like  I  may  fay  ef  a  Teftaracnt  or  Deed  of  Gift :  But 
what  need  many  words  in  a  cafe  where  the  Truth  is  fo  obvi- 
ous ?  If  forae  moral  caufes  may  be  canfes,  and  Agtre  mora- 
liter,  or  produce  their  effects,  even  before  they  are  naturally 
in  Being,  much  more  may  they  fufpend  it,  and  fo  produce  ic 
long  after  they  are  in  Being :  Caftf^e  mim  moralis  ea  ratio  efi, 
ut  (tiam  cttm  non  ejl  aElu^  fit  ejficax^  moio  habe  at  (  ut  lotftiMM' 
tur  itffcholiiyejfe  c.o^nitMm:inqmt  Rivetus  Difput.i^,  de  fdtif- 
fa^.Chrifii.    pag.282. 

Next  you  fay,  ^Teaitistke  fame,  though  mrie^ere  aSiu- 
allj  jtiftified.  ]  Anfwer.  This  requires  no  other  anfwer,  then 
what  is  given  to  the  former.  It  is  the  fame  Pbjftce  co»ftder^ta  , 
vel  in  Entitate  nAtHrali :  But  the  moral  adion  of  pardoning 
and  juftifying  is  not  the  fame,  nor  is  at  ail  :  A  conditional 
^Ardon,  Deed  of  Gift,  Tcftament,  ^c.  doth  not  at  all />4r- 
don,  or  Qive^  till  you  perform  the  condition.  For  it  is  the 
proper  nature  of  a  condition  to  fufpend  the  aA  of  the  Grant : 
fo  that  till  it  be  abfolute  or  equal  to  Abfolute,  it  is  not^^«- 
al  Rcmifiion.Juftification,  c$^c. )  The  reafon  of  alhhis  is,be- 
caufc  thefe  Laws,  Teftaments  or  Promifes,  are  but  the  Law- 
makers, TeRators  or  Donors  Inftruments ,  and  therefore 
ad  when  and  how  he  pleafes ;  and  it  is  his  pleafure  that  they 
(hould  ad  no  otherwife  then  as  is  aforefaid ,  and  as  in  the  Te- 
nor of  them  he  (hall  exprefs. 

Next  you  add  [_Tobej»^i^ed,  notes  afjijfi(fn~  "^hlch  pre- 
fu^pjfeth  an  ACiion  tranfient^  not  iwmarent^or  onlj  Gods  purpofe 
tojnftifie  :  ~]  Anfwer  i.  So  far  as  the  Reception  of  a  Rela- 
tion may  be  called  a  PalTion,  this  is  true:  And  no  doubt  you 
are  in  therighti  that  it  is  not  AUus  immmens.  But  now  , 
fVhat  tranfient  Ati  it  i?,  I  remember  very  few  Divines  that 
once  tell  as ;  but  only  in  general  fay,   ft  is  a  Tmnfitnt  A^. 

Xx  Now 


cm 


Now  you  artd  I  that  have  adventured  to  enquire,  do  happen  to 
be  both  fingular  from  others, and  differing  between  our  felves, 
(  only  Mr.  Rnthtrforti,  and  fome  few  others  I  find  faying 
oft,  that  we  arc  pardoned  and  juftified  by  the  Gofpel ;  by 
whiih  they  fecm  to  mean  as  I  )But  for  your  way  of  Juftificati- 
on  by  a  fentence  before  the  Angels ,  as  I  never  mcc  with  any 
that  judged  thit  to  be  our  Juftificacion  by  Faith,  fo  as  1  have 
faid,  itfeemsco  coevery  groaadlefsand  {Grange.  And  then, 
if  yours  ftandnot,  mine  only  rauft,  for  anything  that  is  yet 
difcovered^tbat  I  have  feen/or  I  know  of  none  that  cells  us  of 
any  third, 

Your  nexr  Objedion  is  the  fame  before  anfwered  ,  that 
f  Gods  Tromift  to  j«/?>7»f ,  «  only  a  di^larAtion  what  he  ^tlldo^ 
unci  therefore  a  man  is  not  by  Covenant  '^ithont  a  fnrther  Act 
juflifted,  but'jMJitfiable.  ]  Anfwer.     Grotitts  defatiifaSi.  will 
tell  you,  thatPromifes  give  right  to  him   to  whom  they  arc 
made;  and  that  therefore  they  cannot  be  reclaimed,  though 
threatnings  may.     But  if  tbefe  were  only  Promifes  that  God 
will  by  another  Ad  do  this  or  that  for  us,  then  it  were  to  the 
purpofc  that  you  fay  :  but  that  you  cannot  prove.  Nor  needs 
there  any  other  Ad,  but  the  moral  Adion  of  the  Inftruraent 
it  felf  to  change  our  Relations  here  ;  Etfruftrafit  pro  p/ura^ 
C^c.  Indeed  an  Ad  of  ouvs^'Believing^]mu^  come  in  before 
the  effed  :  but  you  ind  i  are  agreed,  that  this  is  but  conditi- 
onal, and  not  eflfedive.    Thcfe  Promifes  therefore  being  alfo 
Gods  Law,  Teftament  (  of  Chrift  ;  Deed  of  Gift,  Cove- 
nant, OC'    they  do  not  only  foretell  an  Event  to  come  to 
pafs  by  foroe  other  Action;  but  they  do  confer  a  Right  or 
make  due  the  benefit  or  relation,  and  fo  effei^it;  only  the 
Author  is  picafed  to  fufpend  the  effed  of  his  Inftrument,  till 
we  perform  the  Condition.     As  if  by  a  Leafe,  or  Deed  of 
Sale,  there  be  feme  Office  or  Dignity  made  over  to  you;  or 
fome  command  in  Army  or  Court,  or  Country  :  or  by  a  Law 
a  Foraigncr  be  Naturalized  or  Enfranchized,  onfuchorfuch 
a  ConditionjThis  Leafe  or  Dced,or  Lawdoch  not  only  foretel, 
but  effed  the  thing. 
y  You  add  that  [_^fnfification  is  4  C^urt-ternfy  importing  an 

A^  of  Cja^as  Jttdge^  rviatreai  hit  ^romifir.g  is  r,ot  his  A  El  as 


Oa9) 

^udgt^  Ifut  ReFlor.]    Anfwer  i.    If  by  a  Court-term,  you 
alfo  mean  a  Law-term^  (  verhu^forotfe  ox JHcHciArium  in  the 
full  fenfe)  I  agree  wich  you.    But  if  you  confine  it  to  the  fcn- 
tcncc  as  pronounced,  I  require  Prdof;    as  alfo  proof  of  any 
fuch  fentence  before  Judgement,  particular  or  general.    A 
Redor  is  either  Suprtmftt  or  SHbalternus :  A  Judge  is  either 
fftpreme  af>ave  all'Larvs,  a^bcing  the  Law-givcr,   or  fub  lege. 
God  is  both  Rellor  and  Jftdge^  only  in  the  firft  fenfcs :  and 
^yji*<^ging,  he  Ru/etb  ;  and  Re[hr  is  but  the  Genus,   whereof 
ftidexisdifpecits.     As  Re^orfi4premt*s, God  hthc  Legi^ator, 
and  fo  acteth  (and  juftifieth  by  his  Laws,  Grants,  c^c.   ) 
as  Judge  he  fenterceth  and  abfolvcch  thofe  that  were  firft 
made  juft.     A  man  is  accufed  for  killing  another  in  fight,  at 
the  command  of  the  Sovcraign  Power.    Is  it  not  as  fit  and 
proper  2  fiying,  to  fay  ^  The  LaVo  doth  jujli fie  thu  nt4»  forfo 
doing  agiinf}  all  Accufers^  ]  as  to  fay,  Q  The  Judge  vfilljufitfie 
himT}  J  Nay,    Is  it  no:  mor-j  ordinary  ?   And  in  a  fort,   the 
Suprcam  or  Sovcraign  may  be  faid  to   be  (  though  in  a  diffe- 
rent fenfe  )  juftitlcd  ,  ai  well  as  an  Inferior  •,  when  yet  the  faid 
perfon  in  iupremacy  hathno  Judge,  nor  isto  have  any  by 
Lavv,and  fo  cannot  be  juftified  by  fentence.    God  will  be;»y?/- 
fied  in  his  fayings,er<?.as  he  hatfi  in  a  fort  bound  himfelf  by  his 
own  Laws,ih?t  is,  fignified  his  Refolution  toofeferve  them;  fo 
in  the  fenfe  of  thefe  Laws,  his  works  are  now  juft,  and  fhall  be 
hereafter  fo  be  manifefted  :     but  not  by  any  fentence  of 
a  Superior.    But  this  I  confefs  differeth  from  our  Juftifica^ 
tion. 

Next  you  ray,[^r(j«  k»oVv  not  rmhence  it/honldh  that  ,4>tgeds 
fhould  jtidqe  us  righteous,  and  rejoice  therein^  but  by  a  fentence 
p^Jfedin  Heaver).^    Anfwcr.  If  you  think  (  and  prove)  that 
Ahgels  cannot  know  us  to  be  righteous,  then  I  will  not  affirm 
that  they  judge  us  fo.  For  I  prefappofc  that  that  the;  know  oi 
to  hz  fo  made  by  Tome  Act  before.and  therefore  they  judge  us 
to  be  39  we  are.  And  if  they  may  know  that  we  are  Believers, 
and  know  that  the  New  Law  jufliiiechall  fuch,  then  they  may 
jud^e  us  to  be  juftihed  without  any  fentence  in  Heaven,  even 
as  they  know  when  a  finner  is  converted,  and  rejoice  in  it  ^ 
which  doubtlefs   they  may  know    without   a  fcntjrce   in 

Xx  2  Heaven 


(ho 


Hcaren  pronouncing  us  converted;  and  Gods  making  them 
Inftruments  in  conferring  his  Mercies  may  make  them 
know. 

You  fay  that  [  Confitmlvt  Juflificdtion  ,  (liferent  from  Dt- 
cjarativeby  fenttnce^Idonot  find  ex  pre J[td  undtr  the  term  (JvL* 
ftification  :  )  it  would  he  confidered »  whether  any  other  ASl  he- 
fide  the  fentence^  doth  makj!  a  man  juft ,  but.  giving  of  faith,  ] 
Anfver,  Thefe  two  things  Khali  prove  to  convince  you  :  (be- 
caulfe  this  is  of  fome  moment.)  i-  That  fomeA<Jl  there  muft 
be  ro  con-itute  us  juft,before  or  befides  the  fentencc.  2.  That 
neither  the  fentencc  nor  the  giving  of  Faith  doth  firft  and  pro- 
perly conftitute  ui  Juft. 

I.  If  we  be  not  juft  before  we  are  judged  as  juft,then  Gods 
Judgement  (hould  not  be  according  to  Truth. But  Gods  Judg- 
ment is  according  to  Truth  :  therefore  we  are  juft  before  we 
arefo  judged.  2.  He  that  hath  Chrift,and  the  Benefits  of  his 
fatisfaftory  Righteoufnefs  given  hira  by  the  New  Law,  Cove- 
nant, Teftament  or  Grant  of  Chrift,  is  hereby  conftituted  righ- 
teous. But  every  Believer  hath  Chrift  and  the  faid  benefits  Gi- 
ven him  in  and  by  the  Law  or  Covenant:  therefore  he  is  there- 
by made  or  conftituted  Righteous. 

And  here  by  the  way  take  notice,  that  the  New  Law  or  Co- 
venant hath  two  Offices ;  the  one  to  Bejiow  Right  to  the  Be- 
nefit :  and  hereby  it  mukei  Righteaus  :  The  other  to  Declare 
and  miKifefl  openly,  and  to  be  the  Rttle  ofpublicfue  Judgement : 
and  fo  it  doth  both  a^ione  morali  proclaim  believers  righteous, 
andTiW«?i5f;  fentencc  them  fo.  And  therefore  in  Rom.  jo.$. 
it  is  called  [_  the  Right  u>ufnefs  which  it  of  the  La^  ]  And  if  the 
Old  Law  had  a  power  of  making  Righteous ,  if  man  could, 
have  performed  the  condition,  fo  alfo  hath  the  New. 

2.  And  that  the  fentence  doth  not  conflitute  us  Juft  ,  needs 
no  proof;  It  is  the  work  of  a  Judge  by  fentence  to  clear  xht 
.  Guiltlef$,and  not  to  make  them  Guiltlefs.  Pardon  indeed  may 
do  fomewhac  to  it .-  but  that  is  not  the  adion  of  a  Judge  as  a 
judge,  but  (  as  you  before  diftinguiflicd  j  of  a  RtEior  ( in  cafe 
of  tranfgrefling  Lawes  J  A  Judge  pronounceth  men  to  be 
what  they  firft  are  according  to  Law  ;  and  not  makes  them  to 
be  righteous  who  are  not.    He  that  faith  to  the  wicked jhou  art 

Righteous. 


C340 


RighttoHi^NaUont  fhall  cnrfe  him ;  pcflepjallbhorhim  t  Pro.' 
24.24.  Ht  that  jafifieth  the  Vificked ,  A»d he  that  con<iemneth 
the  fnfi  ^eve»  they  hoth  are  abomination  to  the  Lorei,  frov.  1 7. 1 5. 
If  this  were  not  fo,then  we  rauft  believe  that  no  man  is  /uftified 
before  the  day  of  (  particular  or  general )  Judgement,  till  you 
have  proved  that  God  fentencech  at  a  Court  of  Angels. 

And  that  the  Giving  of  Faith  doth  not  make  Righteous 
(that  is,  according  to  the  Law  of  works)  efc^ive,  I  think  you 
confefs.  If  I  thought  you  did  not,  it  were  very  eafily  proved  : 
Faith  being  but  the  condition  of  our  univcrfal  righteoufnefs 
(which  the  old  Law  requireth  in  its  ftcad)cannot  be  that  Righ- 
teoufnefs it  felf  :  and  fome  other  efficient  there  rauft  be  of  our 
J  unification  here. 

Next  you'fay  [  Nof^lthflmding  Chrlfts  De4th  and,  the  Con- 
ditional  Covenant  afore  faith  ^  a  perfon  16  okIj  JHfltfjable  -'  Con- 
ditionalii  nihil  fonit  e^fe.  ]  Anfiv.  Ail  this  is  very  true  :  but  not 
any  thing  againft  me.  I  like  well  what  you  fay  of  Chrifts  death, 
becaufe  it  is(as  Ac^uinas  and  our  Da  venantjVJher^SccSdiV^')  but 
Caufanniverfalii^vtl  Remtdium  omnibru  applicabile.  It  is  to 
prepare  for  and  merit,  &  not  direfl/y  to  f/^^our  Juftification, 
(  whatfocver  the  Antinomiant  dream." )  But  the  Covenant  or 
Teftamentis  the  very  efficient  Inftrumental  caufe  of  Juftifica- 
tion :  and  its  Adion  is  Gods  A^ion.  Yet  its  t(ue  that  Condi- 
tionalis  nihil ponit  in  e(fe:  that  is,  till  the  condition  be  perform- 
ed :  but  then  it  becometh  of  equal  force  to  an  Abfolute  Gift , 
and  doth  portereinejfe-.even  the  tame  Inftrument  doth  if,whofe 
Adion  till  then  was  ( by  the  Authors  will)  fufpended. 


YOu  next  pafs  to  another  Point  C  about  7^f/S9-)  whecher 
Juftification  be  a  continued  Ad.  And  you  fay  chat  [  be^ 
ing  a  Tranjient  AEl ,  it  cannot  be  well  called  a  continued  ASl^ 
Vpbich  imports  a  fucceffive  motion  between  the  Terminus  a  quo 
and  ad  quern,  whereat  thii  AB ,  whether  by  fentence  or  Cove- 
Tiant,  is  not  fueh  a  motion,8cc.]  Anfw.  i.  All  this  may  be  true 
of  a  proper  natural  Adion  :  but  you  know  that  it  is  only  a 
moral  Aflion  which  I  affirm  to  be  continued  ,  and  of  this  you 
know  your  Rule  de  motu  holds  not ,  except  you  take  Motus 

Xx  3  l/irgeljf 


(54-0 


largely  and  improperly.  As  paflive  Juftification,  or  ihe  effeft 
ofthe  Juftifying  Ad  is  but  a  Relation,  which  isthc  weakeft  of 
Entities;  fo  doth  it  ptr  nudam  refultantiam  arifc,which  is  by  the 
weakeft  of  Caufalities;  The  Act  of  God  giving  out  and  enad- 
ing  this  Law  or  Covenant  at  firft,was  maeed  a  proper  tranfient 
Act,  and  is  ceafed  :  but  the  moral  ActionofcheLaw  thusena- 
ditd^'\^coHUn(iaL  The  Law  of  the  land  i  which  condcmneth 
Delinquents,  and  juftifieth  the  obedient,  doth  both  by  a  conti- 
nued moral  Ad.  The  Leafe  of  your  Houfe  or  Lands  gives 
you  Title  thereto  by  a  continued  moral  Ad  So  that  this  which 
I  artert,  is  not  AElu^  repetittti  vtlremvdttu. 

You  add  that  [^  Tom  incline  to  think,  (hat  there  u  hut  cne  Ju' 
fii^cailon  of  A  Terfon  in  thfd  iife^    though  frequent  Remijfion  cf 
fin.']  An(x9.  In  that  you  judge  as  moft  of  the  Orthodox  do : 
And  I  have  faid  nothing  to  the  contrary.    I  thirk  alfo,  that  as 
Scripture  ufeth  the  phrafe  of  oft-forgiving ,  but  feldom  of  oft- 
juftifying,  fo  it  is  fafeft  to  fpeak  as  Scripture  doth.     Yet  as  to 
the  things  me  thinks,  that  as  Remiffion  and  Juft  lication  do  but 
refpedively  or  very  narrowly  differ ;  fo  in  this  cafe,  one  may 
as  truly  be  faid  to  be  repeated,  as  the  other  :  thacis,  A$  there 
is  anuniverfal  Remiflion  of  ail  finpaft,  upon  our  firft  true  Be- 
lieving J  which  univerfal  Remiliion  is  never  iteraccd,  but  con- 
tinued :  fo  is  there  an  Univerfal  Juftification  of  the  perfon  at 
the  fame  time,  by  which  he  is  made  juft,  (  and  in  Law  fo  ertee- 
raed  ,  pronounced  or  judged  )  by  being  acquit  from  the  con- 
demning Power  ofthe  Law,  which  (  for  his  fins  paft  only)  was 
before  in  force  againft  him.     And  fo  if  you  look  to  L  ch  a  Re- 
Hiiffion  or  Juftification  as  wholly  changcth  the  ftate  ofthe  per- 
fon, making  him  Pardoned  who  was  before  wholly  unpardon- 
ed, and  folly  under  guilt  of  all  former  fins ;  or  making  him  ju- 
ftified  who  was  before  un  juftificd,  and  condemned  ( in  Law  ;  ) 
neither  of  thefe  I  think,  are  iterated.     But  then  ,  asyou  con- 
fcfs  a  frequently  renewed  pardon  for  following  fins,  fo  I  know 
no  reafon,  but  in  the  fame  fence  there  muft  be  a  frequent  Jufti- 
fying :  For  as  our  Divines  well  conclude  ,   that  fin  cannot  be 
pardoned  before  it  be  committed   (  for  then  there  (hould  be 
pardon  without  Cu.lt  ^  for  no  man  is  Guilty  of  fin  to  come 
formally  ; )  fo  is  it  as  neceflary  to  conclude,  that  no  man  is  ju- 

ftified 


0^0 


ftified  from  (in  before  ie  be  committed  ^  that  is,frotn  that  which 
is  not  j  and  fo  is  not  fin .-  For  then  Juftificacion  (hould  go  be- 
fore and  without  Legal  Accufation  and  Condemnation  :  For 
the  Law  accufeth  and  condemneth  no  man  for  a  (in  which  is 
not  ctmmittcd.and  fo  is  no  fin.     It  is  faid  sy4f}i  1^59.  that 
(by  Chrift)  w/  4r?  JufUfiidfrom  all  things yfrom  V^'hich  ^e  could 
««!  he  jufitfied  by  tht  Lt$w  ofMofts.    Where,as  I  dcfire  you  to 
obfervc  that  phrafc  of  being  fujlifiedhy  the  Law,to  iLew  it  is 
an  Ad  of  the  Law  ("though  fin  makeih  tranfgreffors  unca- 
pabie  J  fo  you  fee  it  is  a  Scripture  phrafe  to  fay,  we  are  7*/?'- 
fied  from  fin  :   And  then  either  there  muft  be  forae  kind  of  par* 
ticuiarjuftification  from  particular  fins  after  faith  ,  ofthena* 
turc  of  our  renewed  particular  Pardon  j  or  elfe  what  will  be- 
come  of  us  for  them  ?  For  fure  if  the  Law  be  fo  far  in  force 
againft  the  adion?  of  ijelievers  as  to  make  and  conclude  tliem 
Guilty  and  Obliged  to  Punifliraent  (as  much  as  in  it  lyeth )  and 
fo  to  need  a  frequenr  pird&n  (  for  pardon  i;  a  difcharge  from 
Guilt,  which  is  an  Obligation  to  punifliracnt ;  )  then  ic  muft 
needs  be  in  force  to  Judge  them  worthy  condemnation,  and  fo 
to  Accufe  fan  J  as  much  as  in  it  lyes  to  condemn)  them  ;  and  fo 
they  muft  need  alfo  a  particular  Juftification.    But  then  ac- 
cording to  my  Judgement,   I.  There  is  a  fure  Ground  laid  of 
both  in  the  Gofpel  or  new  Law  or  Covenant.    2.  And  the  faid 
New  Law  doth  perform  it,  by  the  fame  Power  by  which  it  did 
univerfally  juftifie  and  pardon  them  at  the  firft.  There  ncedeth 
no  addition  to  the  Law,  The  change  is  in  them  ;  And  the  Law 
is  iB\d>  Moralit  eraser  t  cj  HO  d  Ante  Anon  a^Hm  er  at  y    becaufe  of 
their  new  Capacity,  neceflity  and  Relation.     As  if  your  Fa- 
thers Teftament  do  give  you  a  thoufand  pound  at  his  Death, 
and  twenty  (hillings  a  week  as  long  as  you  live  afrer  ,  andfo 
much  at  your  marriage,  e^c.     here  this  Teftament  giveth  you 
ihefe  new  fums  (after  the  firft)  without  any  change  in  it.-  and 
yet  by  a  new  moral  Ad  ;  for  it  was  not  a  proper  Uift,  till  the 
TermcxprcffedjOr  the  condition  performed  .-and  if  that  rerm 
had  never  come,  nor  the  condition  been  performed  ,  you  had 
uever  had  right  ro  it ;  fo  I  conceive,    Gods  Gofpel  Grant  or 
Teftament  doth  renew  both  our  Rcmifiif>n  and  particular  Ju- 
(lificaiion.     If  Satan  fay,  Thu man  huthdefervtd death  by  fin- 


Cm) 

ing  ftnce  he  Belitved  (as  David)  muft  we  not  bc  juftified  from 
that  Accufation? 

And  here  let  me  ask  you  oneQucftion  ,  which  I  forgot  be- 
fore about  the  firft  Point.  Seeing  you  think  (truly)  that  Par- 
don is  iterated  as  oft  as  ive  fin.by  what  Tranfient  Ad  of  God 
IS  this  done  ?  Doth  God  every  moment  at  a  Court  of  Angels 
Declare  each  finner  in  the  world,remitted  of  his  particular  fin? 
(fov  every  moment  we  commit  them.  )  If  you  once  fee  a  ne- 
cefficy  of  judging  the  New  Covenantor  Promife  Gods  Par' 
doning  Inflrfwttnt,  I  doubt  not  but  you  will  foon  acknowledge 
as  much  about  JuJ}ifcatio».  And  fure  a  Legal  or  written  In- 
ftrument  is  fo  proper  for  this  work,  that  we  ufe  to  call  it  [  A 
pMrdon,]  which  a  Prince  writes  for  the  acquitting  of  an  offen- 
dor. 

Befides.the  Gofpel  daily  juftificth  by  continuing  our  Juftifi- 
cition,  as  your  Leafe  ftill  giveth  you  Title  to  your  Land. 

{Mat.  1 2. 37.  is  of  more  then  the  continuance  of  Juftificaii- 
on,  evenof  J  uftification  at  Judgement.) 


THe  next  Point  you  come  to  about  the  Nature  and  Object 
of  Faith,you  are  larger  upon ,  through  a  miftake  of  my 
word?  and  meaning.  I  know  not  therefore  how  to  Anfwer 
your  Arguments  till  I  have  firft  cold  you  my  fence ,  and  better 
ftacedtheQueftion. 

Indeed  that  in  pag,  1 1 .  of  Reft  ,1  apprehended  my  felf,fo  ob- 
vio  us  to  mifconftruSion,  that  1  have  correded  it  in  the  fccond 
Ed'f  jOn  (which  is  now  printed.^  Yet  i.  I  fpoke  not  of  faith 
as  Jf*J^if)wg,  but  as  the  condition  ofSalvation,  which  contains 
more  then  that  which  is  the  condition  of  our  firlt  juftification. 
2'  I  neuer  termed  thofe  GoffeJ-Precepts;whkh  are  not  in  forac 
way  proper  to  the  Gofpel.  And  for  the  next  words  [  That 
fuhjtfiion  toChri(i  U  an  EJfentiai  part  of  faith.  ]  I  confefs  I  do 
not  only  take  it  for  a  certain  Truth,  but  alfo  of  fo  great  mo- 
ment, that  I  am  glad  you  have  bent  your  ftrength  againft  iz , 
and  thereby  occationed  me  to  fearch  more  throughly.  But 
then,  if  you  think  (as  you  fcem  to  do  j  that  by  [_Sui>je&wtt] 
I  mean  [^  A^ftal  Obtditnct  ]  yon  quite  miftake  mc ;  for  I  have 

fully 


(HO 


fully  opened  my  mind  to  you  about  this  in  myAphcri/!  tha^ 
fpcak  only  of  the  fubjeaion  of  the  Heart ;  and  not  of  the 
j^^HdObedteacty/hiQh  is  the  pradifc  of  it.  I  fpeak  but  of  the 
Acceptation  of  Chrifl  for  our  Lord,  or  the  Confent  thereto, 
and  fo  giving  upourfclves  to  be  his  Difciples,  Servants  or 
Subjefts.  This  I  maintain  to  be  an  EHential  part  of  juftifying 
Faichjin  the  rtrict  and  proper  fcnfe  of  that  word. 

Its  true  that  dejurc  Ghrift  is  King  of  U  ibelicvers,  and  fo  of 
them  that  acknowledge  him  not  to  be  their  King.  But  in  or- 
der of  nature,  the  acknowledging  of  his  Dominion,  and 
eonfent  thereto,  and  fo  receiving  him  to  be  our  King,  doth  go 
before  our  obeying  him  as  our  King.  As  a  woman  in  marri- 
age-Covenant ,  takethher  Husband,  as  one  whom  (he  muft 
obey  add  be  faithfuil  to :  But  that  taking  or  confenting,  goes 
before  the  faid  Obedience,  as  every  Covenant  before  the 
performance  of  it.  Yea  though  the  fame  act  fhould  be  both 
an  acknowledgement  of,  and  confent  to  the  Authority,  and 
alfo  an  obeying  of  it ;  yet  it  is  Qttatenus  a  confent  and  accep- 
tance of  that  Authority,  and  not  as  it  is  an  oheying  of  ic,  chat 
I  fpeak  of  it  when  I  afcrtbe  JuRification  to  it  :  as  faith  in  the 
cow»»fl«/f«/f  is  certainly  an  act  of  Obedience  to  God  :  and 
yet  Divines  fay  ,  it  juftifies  not  as  it  is  Oheiienct,  but  as  an 
jnjirHment.  So  that  by  Heart-fuhjetlion  to  ^hrij}^  I  mean 
that  act  by  which  we  give  up  our  felves  to  Chrift  as  his  Sub- 
jects to  be  ruled  by  him  •,  and  by  which  we  take  him  for  our 
Soveraign  on  his  Redemption- title.  But  when  I  judge  the 
word  Faitb  to  be  taken  yet  in  a  larger  fenfe,  comprehend- 
ing obed;ence,I  never  faid  or  thought  that  fo  it  is  the  condition 
of  oar  firfl  Juftifica:  ion,nor  will  I  contend  with  any  thai  thinks 
the  word  is  never  taken  fo  largely ,  it  being  to  me  a  matter  of 
fmal  moment.  Now  to  your  Objections. 


I.  "WOU  fay,  £  Faith  'di'ork.eth^y  Love^  ^e.  ]  Anfwr. 
I  I.  Faith  is  fometime  taken  ftrictly  for  a  Belief  of 
Gods  word,  or  an  Affent  toits  Truth.  2.  Sometime  more 
largely  for  the  wills  embracing  alfo  of  the  objcc  as  an  offered 
good,  befides  the  uDderfl»ndings  AlTcnt  to  the  Tiuth  of  the 

Y  y  word 


(540 


word  which  ofFcreth  it.The  former  it  by  the  A  poftle  oft  diftin- 
gui(hed  from  Love,  and  is  ftid  to  work  by  LOve ;  as  the  live- 
ly acts  of  the  underftanding  produce  anfwcrablc  motions  in 
the  will.     But  the  later  is  chat  fiiith  which  juft.fieth ;  to  wit. 
The  Rtceiving^f  anojfertdChrijl.  And  thiscomprixeth  both 
the  Act  of  tht  Uidcrftanding  and  Will  (  as  almoft  all  Prote- 
ftant  Divines  affirm.  )  But  bo:h  thefe  acts  together  are  called . 
Ttiith  from  the  former,  which  is  moftftrictly  fo called  :  be- 
ca-ife  the  great  difficulty  then  lay  in  Helievmg  the  Tr«th  of 
the  Gofpel,  C  and  would  do  ftill,  if  it  were  not  for  the  ad- 
vantages of  Credit,  Education,  Cuftom,  (^c»  ^  therefore  the 
whole  work  is  thence  denominated  :   though  yet  the  com* 
pleating  of  the  work  be  in  the  Will,  and  the  Underftanding* 
Act  but  preparatory  thereto.     2.  You  muft  alfo  diftinguilh 
between  hove  to  Chrifi  the  Midiator,  and  the  Grace  of  CbA' 
rity  i-taertera/^^s  it  is  extended  alfo  to  God  as  Creator,  to 
Saint?,  to  all  men,  &c.  And  between  that  firftact  of  Love, 
which  is  in  our  firft  receiving  of  Chrift,  and  the  love  which 
wc  afterwards  exercife  on  him :  and  fo  I  anfwer  yeu.    i.That 
as  the  Apoftle  diftingui(heth  between  Faith,  Hope  and  L6ve, 
fodol.     2.  Faith  taken  ftrictly  foraffent  ro  Divine  Tefti- 
roony  ,  ^roduceth  love  in  every  one  of  the  forementioned 
fenfes  (  of  the  word  Love  :  )  3.  Juftifying  fiiith  (com,  riziog 
the  wills  icccptance  )  produceth  both  the  g-^ace  of  Charity,  as 
it  is  exercifed  on  other  objects,  and  alfo  the  following  acts  of 
it  towards  Chrift  the  Mediator:     And  fol  acknowledge  that 
Faith  worketh  by  Love,  and  that  Love  is  not  faith.    But  yet 
whether  Love  be  not  in  fome  fenfe  eifential  to  juftifying  faith, 
ifyoufpeakonlyof  Love  to  Chrift,  and  that  not  as  a  diftinct 
grace,  but  as  it  is  comprized  in  our  Acceftunce  of  him  at  firft^ 
1  dial!  leave  to  your  conlideration,  when  you  have  fitH  refolr 
Ycd  thefe  things,    i.  Whether  juftifying  faith  be  not  an  act  of 
the  Will  as  well  as  the  Underftanding  }    Few  but  Papifts  de- 
ny it,  and  not  all  of  them.    2.  Whether  CAr»^^«wy^/f  be  nee 
the  object  of  it?    Few  Proteftancs  will  deny  it.  3,  Whethec 
QoodhQ  not  the  e^jfS  of  the  Will,  and  fo  Chrrftbenot  wil- 
led as  Good?    None  doubts  of  it.     4.  Whether  this  willing 
b«  not  the fame  as  Loving,  as  love  is  found  in  the  rational  ap- 
petite ? 


petite  ?    Sure  Aquinas  faith  To,  ro  man  that  I  know  contra- 
dicting it.   5.  Whether  ^cu  can  call  ex^J^4«fr,  or  any  other 
act  of  the  vuiW  jfi/!if)i*i^  ffiih^  excluding  this  w»//>»^,  or  not 
principaliy  including  it?  For  i.  This  is  the  WilU  fir  ft  act  to- 
wards it  object ;  and  will  ycu  fay  that  Love  goes  before  ju&'t- 
fying  faith,  and  fo  before  Juftification  ?  ard  luch  a  Love  as  is 
diftinct  from  juftifying  faith  as  being  ro  part  of  it  ?  How  then 
is  Love  the  fruit  of  faith,  and  as  Divines  fay,  a  confequcncof 
Juftification?  Yet  it  is  be  j  end  all  doubt,  that  this  F^(?//r  or 
Levi  to  Chrift  goc$  before  /Jffiarct  on  him,  or  any  other  act 
ofibcWin.We^f*f>.  1.2.  ^2S.<i.3 3. £m ^20.4,1  Et 
Toltt  it  Antma,  /.  3 .  ca^9.  ^2 7,28    Et  Amef. contra  grtvin- 
chov.fa^.id.  2.  And  can  it  be  imagined  that  preceding  affent, 
and  fubfequent  Affiance,  in  Chrift  (hould  be  conditions  of  our 
Jollification  •  and  yet  the  VtUt  Chrifium  ehUtftw,th^r.  willing 
which  we  call  Confent^  EteQion  or  Acceptance ^  which  goeth  be- 
tween aflcnt  and  Affiance,(hould  be  excluded  as  no  part  of  this 
condition  ?  :?.Efpeciallyconfidering  that  Affiance  contains  di- 
vers a<fts,whereof  one  is  of  the  Irafcible  of  the  fenfitive.and  fo 
is  but  an  impirate  ad  of  the  Will ,  and  lefi  noble  then  that  eli- 
cite  Ad  Cwhich  I  plead  for,)  a$  well  as  Pofitrior  to  if.  and  if 
A<juin.  be  not  out  in  bis  Phiiofophy,  when  he  fo  oft  faith,  that 
jidncit^  is  [pes  roA»r4r4,then  our  Divines  make  Hope  to  juftific. 
Yet  for  all  this,  I  have  not  cfpoufed  this  faying,  that  Loyt 
t4  Ckriji  is  Ejfential  to  jtfP>f)i»g  faith  :  nor  will  contend  with 
any  man  that  thinks  it  unmeet .-  if  we  agree  in  the  things  of 
moment  I  hate  to  quarrel  about  words. 

Nor  do  1  think  it  a  meet  phrafe  to  fay,  wr  4re  juJUfied^j 
l^vt^  (though  in  the  fenfe  before  mentioned,  I  think  it  true,^ 
becaufeitk  but  a  part ,  or  affedion  as  it  were  of  that  rtctf^ 
titm,  by  which  we  are  juftified,  and  ftands  not  in  fo  full  a  rela- 
tion to  the  objed  received- 

And  yet,  if  I  had  faid  none  of  all  this,  I  fee  not  that  I  need 
apymore  then  to  deny  your  confequence,  as  being  wholly 
ungrounded:  For  it  foiloweth  not ,  that  if  it  be  an  # ffeq- 
tial  part ,  that  therefore  it  muft  have  the  Denomination 
of  the  whole  :  yea ,  though  the  whole  be  faid  to  work  by 
that  parr.     The  Brain  and  Heart  arc  effcntial  parts  of  the 

Y  y  2  Body  : 


C?+8) 


Body  ;  and  yet  not  to  be  called  the  Bod^ ;  and  it  is  more  pro- 
per to  fay  that  the  body  works  by  the  Brain  or  Heart  ;    or 
chat  the  vegetative  foul  doth  work  by  the  natural  heat  and 
Spirits;  then  cofay*  the  Body  worketh  by  the  Body,  or  the 
vegetative  foul  by  it  felf.     I  will  explain  all  together  in  my 
ufual  Similicude,  wl  ich  is  Dr.  Prefions  (  or  rather  Pauls  ) 
A  condemned  Beggar  is  offered  a  Pardon,  and  alfo  to  be 
made  a  Queen,   if  (he  will  but  take  the  Prince  for  her  Hus* 
band.    Now  here  put  your  Qjieftions.     i .   Js  Love  any  psrt 
vf  the  Condi' ijn  of  her  Pardon  and  Di^nit)  ?     Anfwer,    Yes: 
An  cflcntial  parcjfor  Confent  is  of  the  Effence  of  it ;  and  Love 
is  tiTential  to  true  confent,  to  receive  any  offered  good :  Not 
love  Hi  ic  is  a  fajjion,  but  as  it  is  an  a<^  of  the  rattoBal  Appe-* 
tlte ;  which  ii  but  Felle-^  And  Sltgere,Confent$re^Acceptare  are 
nothing  eUe  but  a  reffthivt  yf^ilHng*     2.  But  it  is  not  Love  as. 
a  Vertue  in  general,  or  as  exercifed  on  any  other  objed, which 
is. this  effential  part  of  the  Condition  :    but  only  love  to  him- 
whom  (be  marrieth.    And  fo  her  firft  loveisneceffary  to  her- 
Pardon  and  Dignity  as  begun  ,•  and  her  continued  love  (  and 
roarriage-faithfulnefs )  is  neceffary  to  them  ^s  they  are  to  be 
continued :  (Juppofingthc  Prince  to  knowthe  heart  as  Gbrift* 
dolh.   )  Qu.2.Isitthe»ameetph'a/etofayythatfheijpardoM- 
ed and  digmfiedy) loving  ftfch  a  Prince  }  Anfw.   It  hathTomev 
Xtuth  in  it,  but  itis  notafitfpeech  ;  but  rather  that  it  is  ^7 
mArtjtng  him,  bccaufe  Love  is  but  a  par  t*  or  as  it  were  an  Af^' 
fedion  of  that  CMarriage  Covenant  or  confent  ,  which  indeed ' 
doth  dignifie  her.     Love  may  be  without  marriage,  but  not 
Marriage  (  cordiaiiy )  without  Love.     So  in  our  prefent  cafe* 
}uflifying  faith  is  the  very  Marriage  Confent  or  Covenant 
withChrift  j  Itistherforcfictertoray,  we  arejuftilied  by  it, 
thenby  love ;   becauTex  he  former  expreffeth  the  full  conditi- 
on :  the  latter  nor.     ^«.  3.  ^f  love  bean  ejfentialpMft  of  tht' 
MarTiagi^confent  ^thtn  may  vfe  not  oi  rrelljaj,  Jidarriage  canf- 
(ttiy  Marriage^  as  tofnj^  C^larriagecaufeth  Love,  Anfwer  No.  • 
For  I.  That  Loye  which  it  caufeth,  is  the  following  ads  of  ^ 
Love.     2.  And  the.  name  of  Love  ismolt  ufually  given  only- 
so  the  Pifiion  which  is  in  the  fenfitive ;  but  not  ufually  to  the- 
iiBsei  r<r//rs  the  elicite  ad  of  (be  rational  appe:i£e» .  I  have- 


(H9) 


been  the  more  prolix  on  this,  becaufe  icferves  alfo  for  an- 
fwer  to  other  of  your  Obiedions.efpecially  the  third . 

2.  You  objcd  [  Qojpel' Precepts  urtmanj,  if  not  all,  the 
fame  ^ith  the  tiornl  Z« « *  :  ifjuflifiei  then  bj  »bedtence  to  them; 
are  Wr  not  jit(}i(ie4  by  the  works  of  the  L<iw  ?  &c,  Anfwcr. 
I.  y^ww  yields  the  whale.  2.  If  you  fpeak  of  our  Juftifi- 
cation  ac  fir(^,  by  which,  of  guilty  and  lyable  ta  condemna- 
tion, we  become  re6ii  in  cuna,  or  are  acquit,  I  then  yield  all*' 
that  you  feek  here,  vi^,  thac  we  are  not  juftified  by  works. 
3.  This  objcftion  is  grounded  on  your  formcncioned  miHt^'ke" 
of  my  meaning,  as  if  I  thought  that  juftifying  faith  contained 
eflentiaiiy  luch  obedience  or  works.  4.  We  are  not  jaftified 
by  worksof  the  Law,  if  you  mean  the  Law  of  works,  or  by 
any  worki  which  make  the  reward  ro  be  not  of  Grace,  but  of 
Debt,  which  are  the  works  thac  T^w/fpeaks  of.  5.  That 
which  you  call  the  moral  Law,  t/Zc.  the  bare  Precepts  of  the 
Decalogue,  taken  Dtviffn,  without  the  fan^lion ,  Vi-a-.  chc" 
Promifeor  the  Coramination.,  is  not  the  Law,  but  one  part  of 
the  Law:  and  the  other  part,  t;/c.  the  fandion  adjoined,  if 
diverfified, makes  it  two  diftin:^  Laws,  though  the  Duty  com- 
manded be  the  fame.  The  Lawthatcommandeth5'oc'r<ire;to 
dt'inkCicHtam^  is  not  the  fame  with  that  which  fliould  com", 
mand  a  (ickmanto  drink  fome  for  a  cure.  6.  That  our  Jufti- 
fication is  continued,  on  conditionof  our  fincere  obedience,, 
added:to  our  faith)  I  mantain  with  y>/w*/.  7.Willyouanfwer 
your  own  objeSion,  «nd  you  tell  me  what  to  anfiver  :  Faith  is 
a  duty  of  the  moral  Law:  if  we  are  juftified  by  faith,  then  we  • 
are  juftified  by  a  work  of  the  Law.  I  know  you  wil!  not  cvadc^ 
asthofe  that  fay,Faith  is  not  a  work.bat  a  PaiTion  nor  as  thofc 
thatfay,  weare  juftified  by  it  not  asawork  butasanlnftrU'- 
mcnt :  for  I  have  heard  you  difclaim  that.Ifyou  fay  it  is  not  as 
a^work,  but  as  a  condition  by  the  free  Lawgiver  a p  ;o'rnted  to 
this  end,  thenyoufayas  Ido,both  offaich.aiidfeconuanlyof 
works.  >  Eor  what  Divine  denyeth  works  to  be  a  condition- of' 
Salvatioo.oFof  the  final  Juftification  ^orofour-prefentjufti- 
!ftcation  as  continued ,  velnon  amittendi  fi^jiificsttontm  jamrf 
uftAm,  asConr.  'Sergius  faith  ;  I  know  but  one  other  cvafibn 
itifc  in  the  world;  which  I  once  thought  none  would  have-ad-- 

Yy  3,  Tetter 


(550) 


ventured  on  ;  but  lately  an  acute  Difputant  (with  me)  'main- 
tains ,  that  faith  it  not  conditio  mortUs ,  velex  volnntate  canfH- 
tHtr.tis^Mt  Conditio  f hyftc A  viltxnatMT a  r«»,ButI  tbiok  I  (hall 
eafily  and  quickly  difprove  this  opinion. 

RAloabs  and  v/^brahams  works  were  works  of  the  New  Law 
of  Grace,  and  not  of  the  eld  Law  of  works. 

In  a  word,  As  there  is  a  twofold  Law ,  fo  there  is  a  twofold 
Accuation  and  Juftification  :  when  we  are  accufed  as  breakers 
of  the  Law  of  works,  that  is,  asyiff^rr^  in  common  fort,  and  fo 
ts  lyablc  to  the  penalty  thereof ,  then  we  plead  only  Chrifts 
fatisfadion  as  our  Rigbteoufnefs ,  and  no  work  of  oar  own  t 
But  when  we  are  Accufed  of  final  non- performance  of  the  con- 
ditions of  the  New  Law,  that  is  of  being  Reji^ltrj  ofChriftkt 
^Mediator,  we  are  juftified  by  producing  our  faith  and  iincere 
obedience  to  him.  The  former  Paul  fpeaks  of  ^  and  Jumts  of 
the  latter.  You  may  fee  Divines  of  great  Name  faying  as  i  in 
fhis,  zsC^tad^Deodate  on  James  the  2.  bucmoft  fiilly  T/4< 
catu  inThf.  Salmuritnf.Thefde  Jufiificicc. 

To  your  third  Objedion,  That  Faith,  Reftntsmeiy  Hcfe  uni 
Love  {as  before  explained)  are  difiinguified,  I  caHly  yield  ytMi^ 
But  where  you  fay  (Faith  and  Lave  have  different  Object /her f 
fore  one  U  no  ejfential  part  of  the  ether  )  I  anfwer,  That  htith  in 
Chrift,  and  Love  to  the  Saints  (  which  your  Texts  mention  ) 
have  different  Objeds,  I  foon  confefs.  But  faith  in  Chrift  (as 
it  is  the  firft  Ad  of  the  Will)  and  love  to  Chrift)  have  one  and 
the  fame  Objed^beyond  all  doubt. 

Your  fourth  I  wholly  yield,  if  you  fpcak  of  faith  ftridly,  or 
as  it  Juftifieth,  and  not  in  a  large  improper  fence. 

Your  fifth  is  grounded  on  the  forementioned  miftakc  of  my 
meaning.  And  there  needs  no  further  anfwer,  but  only  to  tdl 
you,  that  though  (incerc  obedience  to  all  Chrifts  Lawes  be  a 
part  of  the  condition  of  our  Juftification  Zi  continued  ztA  con- 
jummate  at  Judgement ;  yet  tt  follows  not  that  every  particu^ 
lar  duty  muit  be  done.no  more  then  that  ^^am  muft  obey  eve- 
ry particular  Law  before  he  were  adually  ju(^.  It  is  fufficient 
chat  there  be  no  other  defed  in  our  Obedience,  but  what  may 
ftand  with  fincerity.  The  fame  Precept  may  command  ,  or 
make  Duty  to  one,  and  noc  co  another,  and  fo  be  no  Precept 

as 


OTO 


as  to  him.  A  man  that  lives  but  an  hour  after  his  converfiort," . 
is  bound  fincerely  to  obey  Chrift  according  to  his  Law :  but  he 
is  not  bound  to  build  Churches,  nor  to  do  the  work  of  twenty 
years.  Chrift  may  be  received  as  K(ng,  (and  is)  in  the  fame 
moment  in  which  he  is  received  as  Juftihcr  j  and  in  that  recep- 
tion we  covenant  to  obey  him,  and  take  him  for  our  Lord  to 
the  death  ;  but  nor  to  obey  him  on  earch  when  we  are  dead  j 
for  we  are  then  freed  from  thefe  Lawes,  and  come  under  the 
Lawes  of  the  Glorified. 

To  your  fixth  I  anfwer ,  The  Tests  alledged  have  no  Ihew 
of  contradif^ingthePomt  you  oppofe.     One  {Akb^wt  are  ju- 
Jpified  hj  h:4  Blood  :  But  doth  it  thence  follow/ rW^/or^  ntt  by 
Btlnving  in  him  or  rtceiving  him  as  Kiffg  ,  are  rve  MAde  parta- 
kfrsoftt.)    His  2?/oa<^isthe Purchafrngcaufe  ,  butweenquirc 
afcer  the  condition  on  our  part.  The  other  Text  faith,  {thrcugb 
faith  in  hi4  'Blood.)  But  i.  it  faich  uoionly  in  his  Blood.  2,  And 
bis  blood  is  the  Ground  of  his  Dominion  as  well  as  of  his  Ju/ii- 
fying  us  :  for  by  his  blood  he  bought  all  into  his  own  hands : 
For>  to  thii  end  he  Died.,  Rofe  anA  Revived^  that  he  might  be  Lord 
ofDeadandLiving.Kom.r^.g.    It  may  be  therefore  thrcu^h 
faith  in  his  Bloody  as  the  chief  part  of  the  fitisfadion,  and  yet 
neceflarily  alfo  through  faith  in  kimfelf ,  or  the  Reception  of 
^iw/r/y^as  the  Chrift.    5.  YecdoththeApoftlemoft  convent- 
(Mtly  fay,  [through faith  in  hu  blood)  rather  then  (thrcttgh  faith 
in  ht4  Dominion  or  Government^)   becaufe  when  he  fpeaks  of 
Faith,  he  fpeaks  Relatively  .-  nor  (  as  fome  underftand  it )  by 
Faith  meaning  Chrift  ,  butufingthe  name  of  that  Ad  which 
fklieft  and  fulliett  relates  to  its  Objed  J  and  fo  intending  the 
Object  more  principally  then  the  Ad.     And  as  it  is  fitter  to 
fay,  that  {iveare  fujlifieelbj  Chrifis  blcod^)  then  thlt  (j»e  are 
fftfltfiidbji  hia  Kiitgly  Power  J  therefore  the  Apoftle  ra:her 
fpeaks  of  faith  in  hid  bloody  as  neerlieft  relaring  to  the  Objed. 
Ylet,  as  he  excludes  not  Chrifts  obedience,  ffor  by  hit  obedience 
manyarem»de  Righteotu)  norf^ith  in  hu  (btdience^  and  in  his 
whole  humiliation  as  well  as  his  blood  ;  and  in  his  RefnyreUi- 
ont^nd  Irterceffion  and  Exaltation  ^  fo  not  in  his  Kingly  Office. 
Look  back  on  the  former  Example  to  make  this  plain.  -A  poor 
condemned  woman  is  delivered  and  Dignified  by  marrjing  a 

Prince  .' 


C?5i) 


Prince  that  hath  redeemed  her  on  that  condition.     When  fhc 
fpeaks  of  her  DtliverA>tct^(hQ  will  fay,  [_I am delivtred  by  the 
bounty,  Goodntji  or  Rt demotion   fmj  Trinct^  and  foby  marry. 
>W  kim  that  in  mercy  Redeemed  me,"^  rather  then  [I^m  deliver- 
ed by  marrying  a  Prince  to  Rule  me.\  Bccaufe  in  the  former  (he 
more  fitly  &  fully  exprclTeth  more  of  the  caufe  of  her  Delive- 
rance :  Much  Itfs  will  (be  think  it  a  fit  fpeecb  to  hy^^  am  deli- 
vered by  marrying  an  ^vengtr  of  his  enemies^  a  Condtmntr^  a 
Tunijher.&cc. )  as  you  are  plcafed  to  fpeak  in  this  our  cafe.  And 
yet  who  doubts,  but  her  marrying  or  taking  him  for  her  Huf- 
band  hereafter  to  Rule  her,  as  well  as  prefently  to  Deliver  her, 
is  the  very  true  Condition  on  her  part  of  her  Deliverance  ?  Yea, 
and  if  you  fpeak  not  only  of  her  T>eliverancet  but  of  her  Dig- 
nity (being  enriched.  Honoured  and  made  a  Queen.  )  it  is  the 
fitteft  phrafe  to  fay  ( it  vsoi  by  her  marrying  4  'Trince. )    And 
fo  if  you  fpeak  not  only  of  Pardon  and  Juftification  (  which 
import  our  Deliverance  inftatum  qteo  fWwJbut  alfo  of  our  A- 
doption  to  be  fons,andKings,and  Heirs  with  Chrift,itisno  un- 
fit phrafe  to  fay,  Thu  it  by  our  marrying  King  Jefw  ;  <itby  re- 
ceiving Chrifl  M  the  King  by  Redemption, 

All  the  Benefits  which  we  Receive  from  Chriftf which  follow 
Union)  fuch  as  are  Pardon,  Juftification  and  Adoption ,  do 
flow  from  our  Union  with  himfelf  which  precedes  them.  This 
Union  isby  Faith  :  We  are  united  to  him  as  to  a  Head,  Huf- 
band  and  Prince,  and  not  only  as  a  Juftifier  ?  therefore  from 
him  received  as  a  Head,  Huft)and  and  Prince,  do  ihefe  Benefits 
of  Juftification  and  Adoption  flow. 

To  your  fcvcnth  Objedion  I  anfwer ,  by  denying  the  latter 
part  of  your  Antccdent  [^thdt  Scripture  nowhere  «f4i^*j(Chrifts 
Dominion  you  fay.but)  (^hrifium  "Bommnm  (you  (hould  fay,) 
the  ObjeH  ofjufiifying  Fauh.2  I  never  thought  that  Chrifts  Do- 
minion, nor  ^et  his  Redemption  was  the  proper  Objeft  of  the 
chiefeft  a6^  of  Juftifying  Faith.  But  Cbrift  himfelf  as  Lord  and 
as  Redeemer  is.     I  prove  it,    i.  Ci>ri/?  is.the  proper  ObjeA 
of  juftifying  Faith  (as  I  (hall  anon  prove.)  But  the  name  Chrifi 
figntficth  asdiredly  and  fully  his  Kingly  OflSce  as  his  Juftify. 
ing.    If  you  include  not  his  being  King,  you  Receive  him  nor 
tsChrift. 

2.  To 


OtO 


2.  To  Receive  him  as  Redeemer  is  to  Receive  him  as  King  • 
Forhis  very  Redeeming  was  a  Purchafing  them  inco  his  owa 
hands,  (Joh.ii.i.Afatth.zS.iS.1okiy.2.5ci.i^.  Luk*  lO. 
22.  Efhtf.i,20,U.  fob. $.16,27.  RiM. 1^.9. &c,)  ihoughno^ 
only  fo. 

^.  Tfaim  ».  K^fs  the  Sort  left  Joe  be  artgry^ScQ.  Kifling,  or 
fiibmitting  to^and  Receiving  the  Son  as  King(for  fo  the  whole 
Pfalra  expounds  ic)  is  the  condition  of  cfcaping  wrath ;  there* 
fore  of  Pardon  ^for  Toe»4  &  Veniajunt  advtrfk  :  )  therefore 
ofour  Juftitication. 

4.  Matth.  II.  ZJ.  Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labour  and  art 
heavy  Ucten,  (Guilt  is  the  great  load  :  )  But  under  what  Notir 
on  will  Chrilt  become  to?  Jake  my  joke  and  bftrthen^&cc.Ledrn 
ofme^icc.  and  ye  fltaU  find  reft  to  jonr  fouls.  Reft  !  from  what  ? 
from  that  they  were  burdened  with;  and  tha  was  Guilt,among 
other  things .-  and  to  remove  the  burden  of  the  Guilt  of  fin ,  oc 
curfe  of  the  Law,  is  to  Pardon  and  Juftifie.  (  I  hope  you  will 
not  fay,  that  the  only  Burden  that  Chrift  offers  here  to  eafe 
them  of,  was  the  Pharifes  rigorous  Interpretation  of  the  Law, 
as  I  was  cold  you  expound  ir. ) 

5.  Luke  ig.ij.  T  he fe  mint  enemies  that  would  not  I  J^ottld 
Reign  over  them^Scc.  If  Rejeding  Chrift  as  King  be  the  con- 
demning fin  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  New  Law ;  then  Ac- 
cepting him  as  King  is  part  of  the  condition  of  Juftification. 
The  Gonfequence  is  plain,  becaufe  the  faid  Rejedion  con- 
demneth,  as  it  is  the  non- performance  of  that  condition  which 
muft  be  performed  to  the  avoiding  of  condemnation.  More 
Scriptures  might  be  brought ;  but  the  firft  Argument  alone  is 
fnfficient,  if  there  were  no  more. 

To  your  eighch  Objedion  I  anfwer.  TheObjedof  juftify- 
ing  Faith  is  Chrift  himfelf  principally  •,  and  the  word  as  both 
Revealing,  Offering  him.PromifingjThreatnirg  :  but  it  is  not 
Chrijf  covumandivg^  firft,  but  Chrift  as  King  to  Command.  This 
is  anfwered  in  the  former. 

T.o  your  ninth  Objedion  I  anfwer;  when  I  fiy  ih«t  |[^#tf«- 
ting  (^hrlji-if  Lord.ia  one  part  of  Juflifying  Faith  f]  I  fpcak  not 
of  the  Act  morally,  asif  ir  had  two  partfr  where  i:  is  entir«  : 
It  is  but  one  moral  Act  to  Accept  of  whole  Chrift  ('if  you  fpeak 

Z  z  fimply 


Oh 


fimply  of  Accepanf^,  asdilimct  from  preceding  AfTent  and  fub- 
fcquent  Affiance. )  But  I  call  it  (p^rt)  in  reterence  to  the  Ob- 
ject,whence  you  fay  arifeththe  Difference:  Though  Chrifts 
Office  of  Mcdiacor  be  but  one  ;  yet  from  the  work?  of  t'^at  of- 
fice we  look  on  liis  '^overning,and  Pardoning  or  Juftifying  as 
diftinct  parts :  and  thence  I  call  this  act  of  faith  (  a  part.)  ]ror 
that  you  f<jy  of  obeJience  following  fai.h  and  as*nciffect  and 
fign,  I  eafily  yield  it. 

But  where  you  fay,  that  \Trufl  U  tht  Gtntu  ^hne  the  Oh- 
'jtEii4  an  incompUx  terni^<  I  anfwer^  if  you  take  faith  as  it  is 
juftifying  (or  the  condition  of  our  Juftification  )  and  not  in 
the  ftri<3eft  fenfe  ,  fo  it  hath  more  Ads  then  one  about  the 
incomplex  term.  And  Affiance  is  the  Genus  of  one  only.  To 
accept  {  an  offered  Saviour,  )  is  an  Ad  precedent  in  order  of 
Nature  before  any  other  ad  of  the  WjII^  that  is,  the  elicite 
Ads  are  before  the  Imperate  :  and  Trutt  is  no:  the  Genus  of 
this,  Befides,  Truft  is  no  one  ad,  but  many,  and  that  of 
both  faculties, and  a  Negation  of  feveral  ads  befides.  A  ccrtaio 
Argument  that  it  is  no  one  fingle  A  I  that  jaftifieth  ,  even  in 
their  Judgement  that  fay  Affiance  is  the  jaftifying  Ad  ^  when 
the  Scripture  fpeaks  of  faith  asAfiiance,  it  includes  Accep- 
tance or  confent,which  go  before  Affiance  in  order  of  nature  ; 
Yea  fome  of  our  moft  Learned,  Accurate  Divines,  when  they 
fay  Affiance  is  the  juflifying  faith,do  either  by  Affiance  mean 
only  that  elicite  ad  of  the  Will,  which  I  call  Acceptance, Con- 
fentor  Election,  or  elfe  C  rather)  they  mean  feveral  acts, 
whereof  this  is  one.  So  Amefim  M«eiftl.\.ixz^.'^A.\7,,fidet 
ifla  cfUA  credimw  non  tAntum  ^eum^  4Ut  T)eo^  fed  in  Dettm^ 
efl  vera,  ac  propria  ftiHcia  :  non  tjua  ioAC  voce  notatur  cert  a  ^ 
ahfolftta  perfttJ.Jiode  hono future-,  fed  ejuafignificat  Electionem 
^  Apprthenlionem  fti^ctentu  ac  idonei  medii,  ac  in  (}uo  ferfua- 
fio  (fr  expeUa'.io  talis  fundatptr.  Quo  fenfti  dicuntur  homines 
fidficiaft  habere  infapientfa,fotentia^Amicis  ac  opibusfuis,  Pfal. 
78.12.  If  therefore  you  underftand  by  Affiance  m^ny  Acts, 
of  which  vel/e  Chrifitimob/atum,  (called  Acceptation^^uiz 
volumHs oh]tElum  ut  obUtum  ;  and  EleElion, ^mavolnwHt  me- 
dium hoc,  rijeBis  aliis ;  or  Confent^  ^ttia  volumus  ex  alttrius 
Promotiontquipriusvolhity  )  is  the  firfl  and  chief,  (ofthofe 

of 


I 
i 


(350 


of  the  Will  Jas  Anefvus  doth,then  I  am  of  your  mind.  If  yoa 
fay  that  Tr/Zr  vel  Accef^tare  is  noicrt^erevtl fidetn  hahre  ifi 
the  common  notation  of  the  word:  I  anfwer  i.  t  includes 
Fe//^as  its  principal  Act  in  the  common  ufe  ofthe  word,  when 
its  object  is  an  Incct*iflex  term  :  but  indeed  it  includeth  more 
«iro.  2  Words  of  Knowledge  In  Sciipture  do  imply  Affec- 
tion we  fay  :  but  w^/// much  more.  ? .  I  anfwer  in  the  words 
of  Amtfms^AfedfilA.i.c.'^.^.Zy'i,  Credere  vulgo  ftgniflcat  aUum 
intellectut  A^enfum  teJUmonio  p-><tbcKtii  :  Jed  quor.iamconfe- 
quenter  volnntas  m&veri  foltt^  G  ex:enderefef€  aJI amfh^er-Jii 
bonum  itafrobatuw^  Ut.rco  fides  etiam  hunc  Voluntatif  actuM 
dtjign^t  fa'is  apte  ,  ejuomc^o  hoc  in  ioco  KecejfH^io  inteltigitHr. 
Eji  f«im  receptfo  hor,ijnh  ra^tone  hom^<^  inttma  uno  cum  ecde^ 
John  1 .  1 2.  Hinc fides  fertur  in  bonum  ;  quod  [er  ifiAwfit  r.O' 
firum.fft  actus  Elcctionis :  ejl  actus  Totius  hominis ;  ^tta  actui 
Intellictui nulh modo  convenlunt. ]ohn  6^55. 

Yea  further,  I  doubt  not  but  where  this  act  of  the  Will  is  in 
fincerity ,  there i<  Juftification  certainly  confcquent :  but  the 
term  A^ar.ce  contains  forae  acts  which  Divines  fay,  do  only 
follow  Juftification.- which  alfo  Awefi.  feems  to  acknowledge^ 
ibid.^. 21.  Qjiodvero  fiducia  dicitur fructusfidei,  verumefidi 
fiducia  prcut  refpicit  Deum  in  futPirum^^  eji  fpes  firma^fed pro' 
ut  reJpicitDeumm  Chrii'hiyi  praefentia  fc  offerenrera,  efiiffa 
Pes. 

Yea  the  fame  Amtfim  td!s  us  MeduKhhz*  cap.$.  That  live 
things  concur  even  to  that  Belief  which  we  call  fides  Divwa  j 
viz . 1 . 2{otttia  rei  a  Deo  tefiattt, z  (-ffuffio  pia  erga  Deum  c^ua  fa." 
citut  maximevalcat  apsfd  »os  ip/im  TefinvoniufJ,  3.  AJfeyifus 
tjuiprabetur  veritui  tefiat^ propter  har.c  (iffeUsonetn  erg/t  Deum 
qui  eft  ejus  tcftis.a,.  y^tjuiefenttu  t»  Deum  ad  illud  ejuod prcpjni- 
tur  conje^uetidum.  5.  EUB:io  vtLi^prehenfio  rei  ip/irfi ^  <^u*  in 
Ttfiimonio  nobis  exhibeiur.  So  that  even  this  faith  hath  many 
adls.  Yea,  and  h^adds,  Primum  horumeft  in  intelleHu  '.  fei 
nonconflituit  fiJeTrry  &C.  ftCundtiw^qH^rtum  ^  cjui*)tu^'  funt  in 
ijoluntate^^coftfliiuuntjidem,  prout  eft  virtus  ^  aU us  rtligio' 
ms.Ttrtiam  {viz,,  afenjuf)  eft  in  intelleEiu^  fed  profit  mcvrtur  a 
volun'aiet,  neejue  eft  proirie  fi'Ci  virtus^  fed  (jft^ury-.  So  that 
this  Dodrine  which  1.  makes  three  aces  of  faith  in  Hie  very 

Z  z  2  Wii 


(^5^) 


will,  2,  and  makes  the  intellectual  acts  C  even  afrcnt)to  b^ 
but  an  effect  of  faich,  ar.d  not  the  vertue,  is  far  from  your* 
( chough  I  fcruple  not  to  take  in,afrent  with  the  reft,  for  all  i*^ 
IS  in  thelnteliecrj  and  ifthcfe  be  all  in  that  faith  which  is  a 
holy  vertue  ,  rmich  more  mufttbat  which  juftifies  contain  as 
much.     And  indeed  to  place  juftifying  faith  only  in  the  intel- 
lect, is  fomewhat  ftrange  for  thofc  that  make  it  the  principal 
Grace.when  Philofophers  will  not  give  it  the  name  of  a  moral 
Vertue. For  in  the  undcrftanding  are  only  intellectual  Habits  ; 
buc  moral  vertues  are  all  placed  in  the  Will,  or  fenfitivc  appe- 
tite ('for  that  quarrel  I  will  pafs  by  ,    whether  they  be  only  in 
the  fenfitive  as  'BHrgtrfdiciut-^tcc.)  if  any  therefore  wonder 
that  I  place  faith  in  fo  many  acts,  and  yet  make  one  the  chief 
compleative  Act,  I  have  yet  further  this  moft  accurate  Divine 
faying  the  very  fame  as  I.  PerftRio  auttmfidti  eft  in  Eleccionc 
tiut  affrehenftone  iiUyqua  hoMum  Propojitumfit  nofirftm.  Hinc  )S- 
dei  natnra  eptime  txplicatur  in  Scripture  cum  fdeles  Mcuntur 
Silhartrt  Deo,  Jof.  23.^.Ad.i  1.23.  &viamveritJt>.s  eligere^ 
Pfal.  119.30,31.      Where  you  fee  alfo  that  by  Affiance  and 
Adhafton,  Amefus  principally  means  the  very  Elicit  act  of  the 
fVill  as  Election  is.    And  indeed  he  that  obferveth  but  how 
the  Scripture  throughout  doth  hang  mans  falvation  or  damna- 
tion on  his  Will  mainly,  Cfo  far  as  it  may  be  faid  to  depend  on 
our  own  acts, )  rather  then  on  any  acts  of  the  underlianding 
C  but  only  as  they  refer  and  lead  to  thofe  of  the  Will  }  might 
well  wonder,that  juftifying favingfaith,the  great  needfull  ad, 
fliould  be  only  intellectual,  and  not  chiefly  in  or  by  the  Wiil.as 
well  as  all  the  reft.  Te  ^ill  not  come  to  me  thst  je  may  have  life  : 
Hovf  oft  would  I,  and  ye  would  y.ot  ?  Tht/e  mine  enetuiej  that 
vrouU  not  I  jhould  reign  over  them,    &c.  PVhoevsr  Will  Jet  him 
ta^e  or  huj  freely ^tLC.  Still  al  noft  all  is  laid  on  the  Will :  and 
yet  is  not  faith  in  the  Will  ?  AQent  may  be  compelled  by  evi- 
dence of  Truth,  and  fo  be  unvoluntary.  And  fo  a  man  may  be 
a  Believer  thus  againft  his  WiJ).-  and  if  this  ivill  fcrvc,men  may 
be  faved  againft  their  WilU*  I  know  fome  think  it  enough  that 
the  Will  commands  the  undcrftanding  to  believe.    But  even 
thusfiiith  tyfmeftM^  l^fednl.  1.2.  c.  they  place  the  firft  principle 
iothe  ^\\\>^ui  fidem  collocantw  fntellectUtHecejfariam  tamen 

fatentnr 


(5T7) 


JMtntur  efe  aVi^uam  matiantm  voluntatis  aci  ajfeft/um  ilium  prtf 
bendum  :  qHemadmodMm  in  fide  bumana  voIftnta>-ium  tjfe  did' 
tur  adhihtre  fidem  altCui-^fiz-erc  a  voiuntati pendeat  fides,  ftecejfe 
ejint  primuprinciptHmfdei  Jit  involuKtate,^. 20  But  this  ij  on- 
ly commanding  the  performance,&  fo  it  is  thus  no  elicit  act(for 
Aejuinas  and  Others  conclude,  that  VdurtAt  eji  Principium  de- 
terrainans  nUnt  huntanos  tjuoadexercitium  actus;  intellectus  aa- 
tem  (jniiid actus  fpeciUcAiionem.  )  But  it  is  moreover  the  Wills 
Elicite  Ad  that  1  aflerc.  And  as  I  faid,  this  imperlum  volun- 
tatis may  poflibly  be  wanting,  and  belief  he  involuntary  for 
the  main.  Let  me  add  but  one  more  confideration,  (  for 
I  perceive  ray  tedioafncfs  )  If  InjideUtj  as  it  is  a  Privation  of 
favin^  faith, and  fo  is  the  condemning  fin  ,be  in  the  Will  as  well 
asin  the  Intellect,  then  faith  muft  be  in  the  Will  too  :  But  In- 
fidelity is  in  both.  Erg^o.  ^c.  That  Infidelity  which  is 
the  Privation  of  meer  afTent,  is  rather  faid  to  be  willing, then 
in  the  Wtll-^  but  that  which  is  oppofite  to  juftifying  faith,  ia 
in  the  Will.  Zwi^ip.ly.  Tioojtmine  enemies  tUn^ouldnot  I 
pjould  raignoverthem^  bringthem  hither-,  ^Q.h\l\\  Amefiui 
MedulA-  2.cap.5.<5.48.  OpponunturiJia{^nfidelitas,SiQ.fidei^ 
non  tantnmtiua  toUunt  y^jfenfum  itlum  Intellectus  ejuleji"  ad 
fidtm  necejfariui  :  fed  el  i  am  <jua  inferunt  d^  inclt^dunt  frivatio- 
mm  illitu  Electionis  c^  apprehenftonis  fidei  ejfi£  eJl  in  Volun" 
lati. 

Surely  an  unwillingnefs  to  accept  Chrift  for  our  Lord  and 
Saviour,  is  no  fmall  part  of  the  condemning  fin  ,  which  wc 
therefore  call  the  rejecting  of  Chrift  ;  The  treading  him  under 
foot '^  Neglecting  fo  great  Salvation-^  Not  willmg  to  come  to 
Ckrifi  for  life  ^  Making  light  of  him^  when  they  are  invited 
to  the  marriage/  A^at^zi")  and  m^kingexcufes :  Not-kj^iing 
thefon^  (  Pfal.  2. )  with  many  the  like,which  import  the  Wills 
refufal  of  Chrift  himfelf,  and  not  only  its  unwillingnefs  to 
believe  the  Truth  of  the  Promifc  or  Declaration  of  the  Gof- 
pel. 

To  your  tenth  Objcdion  I  anfwer  by  denying  the  confe- 
quence  •,  we  fpeak  of  the  foul  as  rational,  and  not  as  fenfitive 
or  vegetative. When  the  undcrftanding  &  Will  receive  Chrift, 
the  whole  foul  doth  it :  that  is,  every  faculty,  or  the  foul  by  a 

Zz  3  ftiU 


C?58) 


full  entire  motion  *in  its  fcveral  Aflingi  to  theObjed  prc- 
fented,both  as  true  and  good.  Your  Joy,  Hope,  Fear,  are  in 
the  fenfuive  :  And  Lovers  z?A^ior\,  and  as  commonly  ta- 
ken. A'ld  for  CMemorj^i3.kt  it  for  an  ad  of  the  U.idcrOand- 
ing  ^  or  of  Underftanding  and  Imaginition  conjund  ;  or  for 
a  third  faculty  as  pleafe  your  fclf,  it  will  not  breed  any  ditificuj- 
ty  in  the  cafe.  But  whether  Fear  be  properly  a  Receiving  of 
Chrift,  or  any  Objed  as  Good  ,1  much  queftion.  I  take  it  ra- 
ther for  the  fhunning  of  an  evil,  then  the  Reception  of  Good. 
So  much  for  your  Objedions. 

I  will  next,  as  impartially  as  I  can,confideryour  Anfwcrsto 
what  I  laid  down  for  the  proof  of  the  Point  in  Queftion.  liuc 
firft  I  muft  acknowledge  ,  that  I  have  given  you  and  others 
great  advantage  againlt  the  Doctrine  of  that  Book, by  the  im- 
methodicalnefs,and  neglect  of  Art,  and  not  giving  the  Argu- 
ments in  form ,  whith  I  then  thought  not  lo  neceflary  as 
now  I  perceive  it  is  :  (  for  I  was  ready  to  yield  wholly  to  Gi- 
Ifteufs  reafons  againft  formal  arguing,Pr<<f4f.4«rf  lib.  z.  de  Li* 
hertute. )  The  prefent  expectation  of  death  caufcd  rae  to  make 
that  hafte.  which  I  now  repent  .yet,  though  I  fee  fome over- 
fights  in  the  manner  of  cxpreflion,  I  fee  no  caufe  to  change  my 
mind  in  the  Doctrine  of  it. 

Alfo  I  mult  dcfire  you  to  remember  here  ,  that  the  proof  ly- 
eth  on  your  pirt,and  not  on  mine  :  ^y^firmanti  inambit  pro- 
b<itto.  Ids  acknowledged  by  almoft  all,  that  fides  qua  fufiifi' 
cat,  fi*fi^fji\f,  faith  is  a  Receiving  of  Chrift  as  Lord,  and  not 
only  as  Saviour  or  Juftiher  :  And  you  and  I  are  agreed  on  it, 
thit  Faith  jaftifieih  not  as  an  Inftrument,  but  as  a  Condition  ; 
fo  that  they  who  will  go  further  here  ,  and  maintain  that  yet 
Faith  jaftifieth  only  As  it  Receivcth  Chrlft  as  Juftifier,or  as  Sa- 
viour, and  not  as  King,  muft  prove  wlwt  they  fay.  If  I  prove 
1.  that  Faith  juftifieth  as  the  Condition  ,  on  performance 
whereof  the  Gift  is  conferred,  2  And  that  this  Faith  which 
rs  the  Condition,  is  the  Accepting  of  Chrift  as  Chrift  ,  or  the 
Anointed  King  and  Saviour :  (  both  which  are  yielded  me ;  ) 
I  muft  needs  think  that  I  have  proved  tha-  the  Receiving  Chrift 
asKing,  doth  as  truly  Jufti  fie,  as  the  Receiving  him  as  Prieft 
or  JuttiHer :  (Yet  I  had  rather  not  fay  that  either  Juftifies, 

(becaufc 


059) 


(becaufc  i .  it  is  no  Scrip:ure  phrafe,  2.  and  feemcth  to  import 
an  Efficiency  •)  but  rather,  that  [^Uv  ar(  juftified  bj  it^  which 
imports  here  bu:  a  condrionality,  and  is  the  Scripture  phrafc.) 
Till  you  have  proved  your  exciufion  of  faith  in  one  refpecc 
ftora  the  Juftifying  Office,  and  your  confinement  of  it  ro  the 
other,  my  proof  ftands  good  :  1  give  you  the  entire  condition : 
and  ubi  Lex  no»  diliir.guit^  ron  ejf  diJlinq^uetidHm  ;  multo  mirnu 
dividentlu-yj.  And  though  thofc  that  affert  the  proper  !  nftru- 
mentality  of  faith  in  Juftifying,  or  elfe  the  meer  natural  condi- 
tionality  ,  may  have  fomething  to  fay  for  their  Divifion  ; 
(though  wich  foul  abfurdities )  Yet  what  you  can  fay,  (who 
have  efcaped  thofe conceits  j  I  cannot  imagine.  Me  thinks,  if 
faith  JuftiHe.as  the  condition  of  the  Grant  or  Covenant ,  and 
this  condition  be  the  Receiving  of  Chrift  as  Lord  and  Saviour, 
it  (hould  be  impolfible  to  ejfciude  the  receiving  Chrift  as  King, 
from  Juftifying,  till  you  firft  exclude  it  from  the  faid  conditio- 
nality.  tyl  JJltiatenu}  ad  om»e  valet  con^f que  tU.  Tojuftifie 
therefore  As  the  condition  (on  which  the  Promife  gives  Chrift, 
and  with  him  Juftification,  )  muR  needs  infer  that  we  are  jufti- 
fied  by  all  whatf  ever  hath  fuch  a  conditionality.  Yet  (as  I 
faid  beforej  when  we  intend  to  exprefs,  not  only  or  principal- 
ly the  Ad  of  the  Receiver,  but  alfo,  or  principally,  the  Grace 
of  the  Giver,  then  it  is  a  fitter  phrafe  to  fay,  wearejuftified 
by  faith  in  his  Blood,  or  by  Receiving  Chrift  the  Saviour  and 
Juflifier:  becaufeit  fuilieft  and  fitlieft  expreffeth  that  Grace 
which  we  intend,  (and  thus  P.7«/oftdoth/)  So  that  they  who 
diftinguiHi  between  fiies  (^ux  Juflifjcat ,  aW^iJej  qua  Jufiifi- 
f^/  and  admit  that  Ad  into  the  former,  which  they  exclude 
from  the  latter,  muft  prove  what  they  fay.  (  Fi^es  qua  j»ftili' 
catf  no*}  Recipit  ChrtfJtttM  vel  tit  Regem  vel  fa^erd^tem^  fed  tan- 
turn  fnfiificat.  i.  e.  ^ua  efi  CorJitio^  non  efl  Receptio  :  Nee 
qua  Rec'pit  fujlificat  :i.e.  ^lua  Recefticnoyi  eff  Conditio  :  .^fa' 
.  teria  f^  forma  *ion  funt  confundeffda.  AFlti*  fiie'f  eft  qua  ft  ma- 
teria, vel  Api  itudo  tantum  ad  cfflctum  conditioKalicatii  :  Di/lin- 
Bio  ig'ttur  ipfa  efi  ir:e'ta.  Now  to  your  AnUvcrs  :  CPardon  this 
prolixity. 

Firft  I  n=!uft  tell  you,  that  by  that  phrife  [  ti-e  ^hole  foul  J 
i  mean  the  entirtmoiionof  ^he  foal  by  Underftandingand  Wil- 
ling, 


0^0) 


ling  to  its  ObjeA  both  as  True  and  Good  ;  For  I  know  the 
whole  foplmay  be  faid  to  underftand  in  every  Inteliedual 
Adion ,  and  to  will  in  every  aft  of  willing.  But  when  it  on- 
ly underftands  or  Art(ents,and  not  willeth,itdochnot  Ad  fully 
according  to  its  Power,  nor  according  to  the  nature  of  itsOt^ 
jed,  when  the  Goodncfs  is  neglected,  and  the  Tru  h  only  ap- 
prehended. And  It  is  not  a  compleat  motion,  feeing  the  Acts 
ofthe  underftandingare  but  introdudory  or  preparatory  to 
thofe  of  the  Will,  where  the  motion  of  the  Rational  foul  is 
compleat.  And  fo  my  Argument  ftandsihus :  If  Juftifying  faith 
be  the  Ad  both  of  the  underftanding  and  the  Will,  then  it  is 
not  one  finglc  act  only  :  But  ^c.  Ergo^  &c.  Proh.  Anttctd. 
Juftifying  faith  is  the  Receiving  of  ChriS ;  but  Chrift  is  Recei- 
ved  by  the  Undcrftanding  and  Will ;  (  by  the  former  incom- 
pleatly,  by  the  latter  compleatly  :  )  therefore  Juftifying  faith 
is  the  Acting  both  of  the  Underftand  ng  and  \Vill.  Prohatttt 
Minor.  Chrift  rauft  be  Received  as  Good  ,  and  not  only  his 
Word  (or  himfclf )  as  true  :  therefore  he  muft  be  Received  by 
the  Will  as  well  as  the  Underftanding :  for  Goodnefs  is  the  ob- 
ject of  the  Will. 

Here  you  anfwer  i .  by  confeffing,  that  Faith  iscalled  a  Re- 
ceiving of  Chriil :  2.  by  interpreting  that  fpcech  [He  is  Re- 
ceived by  the  receiving  his  Word, which  is  received  by  AiTenf.] 
This  is  worth  a  fuller  enquiry,becaufe  the  difcovery  of  the  pro- 
per Object  of  Faith,  will  Ihew  the  proper  Act.  The  Inteliec- 
lual  Act  [AfTent  j  hath  for  its  ohyBum  formalt  the  Veracity 
of  God,  or  the  Authority  of  Gods  Revealing  or  Teftifying : 
This  is  not  ic  that  we  enquire  after.  The  material  Object  (for 
wc  rauft  ufe  the  Schools  cermes  in  this  diftinction,  though  per- 
haps fitter  mig^t  be  found,)  is  i .  Proximifu  ^  that  i^the  moral 
Verity  of  the  Tettimony  or  Word.  2.  Vlteriiu,  the  Metsphy- 
fical  Verity  of  the  Things  fignified  (  as  Chrifts  Perfon,  Godp 
head.  Incarnation,  Rerurreccion,(^<:.)  The  former  is  but  th« 
means  to  the  latter,  and  for  its  fake,  and  not  for  its  felf.  In  re- 
gard of  this  act  of  Aflent,  you  may  fay  as  you  do,  that  Girift 
is  Received  by  receiving  his  Word  :  becaufc  the  Belief  0/  the 
Truth  of  the  Enuntiation  is  the  means  of  our  apprehending  the 
Crath  of  the  Thing  propounded.     But  then   r.  Thefe  are  y/ec 

tW0 


0^0 


two  dlftinct  Acts,  as  the  Objects  are  diftinct.'    2.  And  thk 
I«ellectual  Act  is  called  a  Receiving  of  the  Truth  believed  but 
iroperfecdy  ,  becaufe  k  leads  to  that  Act  of  the  Will  which  (in 
raorallty^is  more  fitly  and  fully  called  a  Receiving:  and  there- 
fore if  Artent  produce  not  that  Accepration  or  confent  oif  the 
Will,  it  cannot  fiJy  it  felfbe  called  a  Receiving  of  Chrift.(For 
of  the  Intellects  Reception  of  the  Intelligible  Species,  I  fuppofc 
we  neither  of  us  fpcakj     The  material  Object  of  Juftifjing^ 
faich  as  it  is  in  the  Will,  is  u  Piincipal,  and  Adequate*  which 
is  Chrift  hirafelf.    2.  SuWcrvientor  Inftrumental,  which  is  the 
CoveHant,Promife,or  teftaaientary  Cifr,in  &  by  which  Girift 
is  offered  and  Given.    Thefe'are  two  diftinct  Acts,  a?t^cAc-  ' 
cepting  of  a  Teftaraeof,and  of  the  legacy :  of  a  Pardon  ^rit- 
ten>  and  the  teal  Pardon  thereby  fignified  :  or  of  the  Oath  of 
Allegiance ,  and  of  the  Prince  to  whom  we  fwear.  But  becaufe 
of  the  Relation  between  the  ei^e  and  the  other ,  Faich  may  be 
called  a  receiving  of  Chrift,  ora  receiving  of  the  Gofpel.    Yet 
fo,  as  ftill  the  proper  principal  Object  is  Chrift,  and  the  Gofpel 
but  mediate,  as  to  him.  Thefe  are  my  thoughts.  Now  ftf  I  am 
able  to  underftand  you)your  words  import.that  in  your  J  udge- 
roent,  Chrift  ii received  two  wayes ;    i.  by  Faith,  and  that  is 
only  by  Affcnt :  and  this  is  only  by  receiving  his  Word  :  that 
Is,in  Believing  it  to  be  True.    2.  By  other  Grates ;  aqd  thofe 
I  think,you  refer  to  the  Wills  receiving.     Againfttliif  opinion 
I  further  alledge,    i.  Almoft  all  Pj^oteftant  D^y'rties  acknow- 
ledge faith  to  be  the  Act  (  or  rather  Acts )  of  both  faculties , 
even Dr  Di>jif«4i»rnot excepted   jiadCantirp  hlmfd^  fpeafcs 
fometime  daj^kly)  infomuch  that  AhlanSllion,  fo^n.>Cr  gitu 
and  many  more  make  it  the  judgement  of  ProtJftants  inoppo- 
■fition  to  Popery.     And  fo  doth  <syi»)fftn4  in  Bellarm.  Enerv. 
though  he  judge  it  (as  Camera)  not  accurate,  in  MtdttlJ.i.r.'^. 
/r3. 23.    Yea  he    that  though  it  muft  be  but  in  one  faculty, 
cboofcth  to  place  it  only  in  the  Will,  and  excludes  Aflfent ,  as 
beingcallcd  faith  quiaparit  fidem.    Excellent  Davenar.t  faith, 
1»  aliufidei  ^vflificantu  Tot  a  Aniwafe  convertit  AttcAttfam  j«- 
^i/if4»ftfw.Determin.  0^58.  pag.174.  And  again,  Fides  ill  a 
^uamferiptHra.  jyfitficaKtem  agnofcity  hahet  in  fe  complicatum 
«^Hmf^oJttntn(i4&lnteUe[lm.  Deterrain.  Q^  37"  pag.  i6($, 

Aaa  Again 


G^'2-) 


Again ,  Ne^HohU  ahfnrelHm  fed  va/Je  confentaieum  viJetur' 
aStfirrt  iSt*m  cjho  tota  unima  friri^CAtur  &■  JufiificatHr  ,  adTo- 
tarn  ammarrt  perttntre  :  it  a  ttt  in  nndo  intelle6iu  habeat  initium  ; 
inVoluntatece^pltmentHm  ibidem.  Again,  ^^Htyd  Phi/ofophan-% 
thr  VoluntAte:v  &  I  lelientim  fjft  duos  pottnUM  rtipfa  dijiin^ 
Hoi  dogm\pltlofo}'hiciimej}^  ubommbt4s  hjindrectptum  ^  ^ 
Theolog!Ct'[do^m(tttbii6  frmandu  aut  ifi{irm4>tdi4 fundamiKtM»- 
mimme  tdomutK :  Idem  ibid. 

2   Affcnt  is  ro?  any  full  moral  Receiving  of  Chiift  :    But 
faith     whi(;h  Juftifieth)  isaful!  moral  Receiving  of  Chrift, 
(f'^b  I.I2.J  therefore  rfTcnt  alone  is  not  the  faith  that  jufti- 
fieth.  '  know  there  is  a  Metonymie  in  the  word  Reciive  (be- 
caufe  jn  ftrict  fpeech  in  Phyficks,  Rectpere  tfl  patij  But  it  is  fo 
ufual  and  near,  that  in  morality  it  is  taken  for  a  proper  fpcecb,' 
to  C2II  the  Acceptation  of  an  offered  good  [^  A  Receiving.  ] 
3  .There  ji  fuch  a  thing  as  the  proper  accepting  ofGbrift,rcqui- 
red  as  of  flat  necefiity  tojuftificationand  Salvation  :  But  this 
acceptation  is  not  in  Scripture  called  by  the  name  of  any  othec 
Grace-.thereforeit  istakenforan  Actoffalth.The  Maj*,I  hope 
noChriftian  willdeny.  For  when  Chrift  is  offered  to  the  world- 
as  their  Saviour, Redeemer,Teacher,King  Husband  j  who  can^ 
chink  that  the  accepting  of  him  is  not  required, yea  even  in  the^ 
offer?  Not  a  phyfical  Reception  which  fomc  abfurdly  anddan- 
gercufly  dream  of  ,  but  a  moral ;    as  when  a  people  take  a; 
man  for  their  King  or  Teacher ;  or  a  woman  takes  a  man  for 
her  Husband.  And  for  the  Minor :  Receiving  Cbrift  offered  ir 
not  ufually  eipreffed  in  the  terra,  Hope,  Joy, Charity, Repcn* 
tance  ;  therefore  it  is  included  in  the  word  Faith  (  unlefs* 
you  can  namefome  other  Grace  which  it  is  ufually  expreffed; 
by.; 

4.  The  Grace  by  which  we  are  united  to  Chrift  is  Faith  .•• 
But  it  is  receiving  Chrift  by  which  we  are  fo  united  to  him.;; 
therefore  it  is  faith  which  is  the  receiving  of  Chrift.  I  fupt-- 
pofe  none  will  deny  that  it  is  Chrift  himfelf  that  we  maftbe* 
united  to  by  believing,  and  not  the  Word  or  Promife  ;  and' 
that  it  fs  receiving  Chrift  which  unites  us  to  him,  is  obvious^ 
iboth  from  the  language  of  Scripture,  and  the  nature  of  the 
shing.    A  People  is  united  Co  their  Prince,  as  the  head  of  the 

Repub- 


C?<55) 


Rcpubliqae,  and  a  Church  to  their  Teacher,  and  a  woman  to 
her  Husband,  by  the  Wills  confent  or  acceptancc,and  not  pro- 
perly (  but  only  initially,  preparatorily,  imperfectly  and  im- 
properly,and  if  it  be  alone, not  at  all)by  believing  the  Truth  of 
their  word«.  cx/w/yiw  faith ,  cJTff<y«/.l.i,c. ^^iS  FiiaitiAm 
cum  fit  prirr.tit  actus  vita  nofirs^  quH.  Deo  tn  Chr  fio  vivimus^ 
confifiat  necefeefiin  unione  cftm  Deo^  <ju^m  ntillomodef^cert 
fotej}  jijfenpis  adhii>ittts  veritati  ^ua  ejl  de  Deo. 

5.  By  faith  it  is  that  we  give  upour  felvcs  to  be  Chrifts  Di- 
iciples.SubjectSjMembers ;  (  For  Scripture  afcribes  not  this  to 
other  viraces  ufually  orcbiefly.     And  to  take  him  for  our  Sa- 
viour and  Head, and  give  upour  felves  as  his  redeemed  and 
Member?,  is  all  one  work.  )  But  it  is  not  by  Aflcnt  only,chief- 
ly  or  fully  at  all,   that  we  give  up  our  felves  to  Chrift  as  Difci- 
ples, Members,  &c.  Therefore  it  is  not  by  Affenc  properly  or 
fully  that  we  receive  Chriit.  So  Amtfitis  ubi  Juprd^  ^.  19.  Crr- 
diturfts  etiitm  forro  cum  ex  tniferU  fenfu ,  G^  ommmoca  Lherati- 
onisy    cunt  »«/f,  turn  inaliU  defeHH^  ntce^e  h^beat  fedederc 
Deo  in  (^hri/lc  tan^uam  Servatori  fnftcicnii  c^  fideli  y  Deetiti' 
anem  ifiam  facere  non  potefi  ullo  tnodo  per  y^jfetifum  Intelle^HS, 
fed  per  Confenfum  VoluntAtls.     And  indeed  I  think  this  Dediti- 
oniirfelf 'delivery  to  be  part  of  Faith  :  and  that  the  covenant- 
ing in  heart  with  God  in  Chrift  ,  is  the  very  juftif^ing  faith, 
taking  him  for  ours  and  giving  up  our  felves  to  him  as  his  .-  and 
the  external  Covenanting  is  the  profeflion  of  Fa  th  .-  and  that 
Baptifm  is  the  marriagc-Tolemnization,  and  cngeg  ngfign  and 
mean?. 

6. That  Ad  which  cannot  be  difcerned  in  a  Saint  (in  it  fclf ) 
from  what  msy  be  in  the  wicked,  is  not  the  receiving  of  Chrift 
(  fully  or  properly  )  which  juftifies;  But  the  Ad  of  AfTcnC 
to  the  Truth  of  the  Gofpel,  as  it  is  in  a  Saint,  cannot  in  it  felf 
be  difcerned  from  what  may  be  in  the  wicked.  Thcefo^e 
the  Ad  of  Affent  is  not  the  Receiving  of  Chrift  whch  ,'ufti- 
fics. 

The  Major  is  hence  evident ;  In  that  )uftif\ing  faith  be'ng 
the  condition  of  our  Juft  fication,  muft  n:cds  b?  the  great 
Mark  to  know  by,  whether  we  are  jul>ified  or  no  :  Bu':  if  t 
could  not  be  known  to  be  fincere  it  felf,  in  vain  is  it  mnde  a 

A  a  a  2  M«!k 


06^') 


liixk  to  know  our  ftatc  by  :  yea  or  a  Conditloit,  almoft  ^ 
when  a  man  can  never  tell  when  he  performeth  ir.  The  Minor 
I  have  endeavoured  CO  prove  in  an  Additional  Chap,  to  the 
third  part  of  m  Book  of  Reft,  to  which  for  brevity,  I  refer 
yovi'DcStoMibtorj^^  have  there  (hewed  you,faith  as  I;  Amtfins 
faith, 4/f^«/.I. I.e.  .^.^.<fitavii  fide)  prafuppottat  femper  notitii 
Evingtiii^nHlU  tamcn  dutHr  in  qn  -njHa  cognitio  fa/Htifera,C^  nb 
ilh  qat,  i»  ^Piibnfclam  non  f^lvandisreperhur^  diverfa^  nip  cenft' 
quer.ter  Ad'EiHtn  ifii*  voluntatis^  dr ab  ipfo  defendtm.foh.  7. 17. 
and8.31.32-  ijohni.-^,  I  doubc  not  but  C  in  the  y«ff«/^ 
fitfs  of  Degree  )  there  is  a  difference  between  the  Intellcflual 
a^s  (as  Knowledge  and  Affenc  ^  in  a  Saint  and  a  wicked  man  : 
but  if  any  think  that  they  are  in  chemfclves  difcernabie,l  would 
he  would  tell  me  one  Mark  of  the  d.ff<jrence.  In  their  diffe- 
rent Effefts  on  the  WilI,I  know  they  are  difcernable. 

7.  If  you  acknowledge  that  other  Graces  receive  Chrift 
as  well  as  Faith,  and  receiving  of  Chrift  doth  make  him  ours, 
and  fo  juftifie  ;  then  you  muft  acknowledge  that  other  Graces 
juftifie  as  well  as  faith- fyea  not  fecondarily  only,  but  as  Prin. 
cipally  as  Faith  :)  But  that  you  will  be  loih  to  do.  The  con*- 
fcquence  will  not  be  avoided ,  but  by  (hewing  thac  there  is  a 
twofold  receiving  of  Cbnft,  and  that  one  juftiHeth,  and  the 
other  not :  which  when  you  have  proved  from  Scripture,  I  wilJ 
yield  :  but  then  at  leaft  I  (Vjall  gain  tbi> ,  that  receiving  Chrift 
juftifics  net  properly  f  AT  »4/«r4  aHpu^fe^ex  volttntateOr^ivan' 
tu\  and  if  I  get  that,I  get  the  main  part  of  the  caufe  in  contro^ 
verfie . 

8.  Affiance  is  judged  by  Divines  to  be  an  Ad  of  the  Will ; 
Bat  Affiance  is  judged  by  the  fame  Divines  to  be. the  juftifying 
Ad :  Therefore  they  judge  that  the  juftifying  KSl  (  and  con» 
fcquently  the  Reception  of  Chrift  )  belongs  to  the  Will. 

9.  The  Velle  or  Elicite  ad  of  the  Will  which  I  infift  on,  I'c 
iht  very  iirft  Act,  and  goes  before  Affiance  (  as  it  denotes  any 
other  Act  of  the  Will :  ;  Therefore  either  this  T///*  muft  be 
the  juftifying  Faith  and  Reception  of  Chrift,  or  elfe  they 
muft  fay. that  there  is  a  fiving  reception  of  Chrift  that  goes  be- 
fore the  juftifying  faith  or  Reception :  which  fure  they  will  not 
grantjthat  raak«  that  Faith  the  aBxf  primus  viufpirituaiif, 

xo^Ufijy, 


G^D 


iG.laftly.The  opinion  fcems  to  me  Co  Improbablcwitbout  and 
ag»inft  reafon,  and  fo  dangerous  [  that  God  doth  afljgn  one 
only  Act  of  the  foul  to  the  Office  of  juftifying ,  efpecially  the 
aft  ofafifentjthat  I  dare  not  entertain  it  without  proof  It  is  im- 
probibie  that  in  a  Moral,  Political,  Theological  Matter,  the 
Moly  Ghoft  fliould  fpeak,as  if  it  were  in  the  ftrictcft  difcourfeof 
Phyficks.lt  is  improbable  that  God  fhould  fpeak  to  man  in  fuch 
a  Moral  difcourfe,  fo  as  no  men  ufc  to  fpeak,  and  t|ieretorc  fo 
as  men  could  not,  without  a  further  explication  underftand. 
Doth  he  that  fpeaks  of  receiving  a  man  to  be  our  Husband, 
rf  KingMafter,  efr.  mean  it  of  one  only  Act  ?  ( though  I  know 
Confcnt  is  the  chief.  )     Or  he  that  gives  any  great  matter  on 
Condition  of  fuch  Receiving,  Doth  he  mean  that  any  one 
fingle  Act  is  that  Condition  ?  Much  lefs  Affcnt. 
Or  is  there  any  likelyhood,  that  when  other  Acts  do  receive 
the  fame  Object,  Chrift,  in  a  way  of  as  high  honouring  him, 
that  yet  God  ftiould  confine  Juftification  to  one  Act,  fitting 
by  all  the  reft  ?  Yea  when  the  reft  are  acknowledged  to  be 
part  of  the  Condition  ?  (  and  Receiving  as  Lord  ,  to  be 
the  f^es  <ju€  }  )l  know  God  is  not  bound  to  give  man  a  Rea- 
fon of  his  Laws :  butyetheufuallydoth  it ;  and  we  mu^ttake 
heedof  aflertiog  that  to  be  Gods  Law,  which  appears  unrea- 
fonible.till  we  can  prove  what  we  fay.  Yea  what  a  dangerous 
lofswillChriftians  then  be  «t,  who  will  hardly  ererbeable 
to  find  out  this  fingle  Art ,  what  it  is,and  when  they  have  it  ? 
Andhethalknowshowqu  ckSpi  its  are  in  their  actings,  and 
withall  how  little  able  we  are  toobferveand  difcern  them,  , 
-  perhaps  many  doubc.whether  you  can  find  a  name  for  any  fin- 
gle act  of  a  foul,  or  know  when  it  is  one  Acf,ind/when  many. 
In  the  forementioned  Inftance  ,  A  woman  is  condemned  for 
Treafon  ;  the  Prince  writeth  to  her ,  that  he  hath  dearly  paid 
her  Ranfom,  &  will  not  only  deliver  her, but  alfo  make  her  his 
Queen,  if  fhe  will  Believe  tbi*,  and  Receive  him  accordinp'y  ; 
If  now  the  Lawyers  fliould  difpute  the  cafe ,  what  fingle  ad  it 
was  thatflie  was  Delivered  and  Dignified  by,  whether  an  ad  ^^ 
of  the  Intelled  only, or  of  the  V/ill  only  ?  whether  Affent  on* 
ly,  or  Affiance?  Yea  whether  agtrniove/  patiers(io(i$  many  here 
do.)   would  not  men  think  that  learning  made  them  dote  ^ 
And  I  would  entreat  you  to  confidcr,  whether  it  were  Gods 
Aaa  3  Dcfigqi 


C^66) 


Defignin  the  Gofpel,  to  advance  any  one  Afl  of  mans  foiil 
above  the  reft,  and  To  to  honi  ur  it  ?    or  rather  to  advance  the 
LofdftjTu  whom  faith  Tltceiveth?    as  Mr.  Gatakerl  h  Sal:- 
ftfarf/j  ,    M'>»J  (peak^clmgeroujlj  in  over-TKAgnifji'.g  their  own 
J^iih^  nkenthty  Jhould  magmpe  Chrijl  whom  it  relates  to.     I 
know  the  great  thing  that  i^icks  with  fome  ,  is  that  the  Scrip- 
ture oft  feems  to  defcribe  faith  by  the  Act  of  A^enting.     But 
confider,fo  it  doth  in  other  places  by  Trttftirtg-^Refling^Taking^ 
Receitin^,  Comings  Sating  and  Drinking^    (  which  CMetafhors 
nmft  needs  lignifie  acts  of  the  fVi/l,)&c.   which  fhew  that  it  is 
not  any  fingle  Ad.     Again,  as  I  faid,  the  WW^  is  denomina- 
ted from  the  firft  leading  and  moft  difficult  Ad;  the  Language 
of  Scripture  is  much  fitted  to  the  times  and  temper  of  the  per- 
fons  to  whom  it  was  fpoken.   Now  the  Jews  did  generally  and 
gladly  acknowledge  that  the  Me0ias  or  Mediator  muft  be  Re- 
ceived^  fVelccmed,  Honoured^  Lcved^  ftthmittedto  :  but  they 
could  not  Believe  that  Chrif  fftu  he  j  And  this  was  foolifhncfs 
to  the  Gentiles  alfo,  as  well  as  a  ftumbling-blcck  to  the  Jews ; 
that  one  that  lived  and  walked  among  them  >     and  feemed  a 
poor  contemptible  man,   and  at  laft  was  crucified,  (hould  be 
God  and  the  great  Redeemer  and  Lord  of  the  world.  I  tremble 
fometimes  to  think,    if  we  had  lived  our  felves  in  thofe  times, 
how  bard  it  would  have  been  even  to  us  to  believe  •  fo  that 
when  the  great  D  fficult  act  is  named, the  other  (  Confent  and 
Affiance;  arc  ftill  implyed.and  included.  I  will  end  with  ^Ime- 
fiHi  true  obfcrvation  to  this  ^wx^Q^z^Mednl.  I.  i.e.  3.  ^Imm- 
visinfcrifturis  aliquando  Afcenfni  veritatiqna  ejl  d?  Do  & 
Chrijfo,  J  oh.  1.50.     habetHr  pro  vera  fide  ;  includitur  tamen 
femper  fpecialu  fiducia :  at^  adeo  omnbpu  in  locii  uhi  fermo  efl 
de  faint  art  fide  ^  vel  fraJtipponitHr  fiduclx  in  Mtffiam^  &  indica- 
tur  t  ant  urn  determination  vel  applicatto  ejus  adperfona^  Chrifii ; 
vt/  per  A^enfnm  ilium  deftgnatur^  tanquam  effcElnm  pn  fuam 
cau/am Job^l  1.25,26,27.  (  §.  20.  J 

'     The  fccond  Argument  which  you  anfwer,  lyeth  thus.     If 
Faith  be  the  work  of  the  Heart  and  ihe  whole  Heart,  then  it  is 
not  only  in  the  Underftanding ,  but  in  the  Will  alfo.    But  the 
former  is  the  words  of  Sofipiure ,  JliJ.  8.  37.  R^m.  10. 10, 
£r£0^^c, 
'  Here 


(3<^7) 


'  Hcr€  you  anfwer  that  £the  whole  heart  notes  not  every  intvard 

faculty,  but  (at  often)  ftnceritj.  ^  To  which  I  Reply ^  i.  The 
word  \yiihole\l  yield  to  llljricui  fignifies  the  Jincerit^^  which 
is  ufually  exprefTcd  by  Integrity  ,  but  the  word  ^Heart']  figni- 
fies the  [HhjtH  •  and  is  commonly  taken  for  the  ^yt/l^  and  oft 
for  the  whole  foul ,  Under jlandhg  and  ivi/l,  (  as  moft  Fathers, 
Schoolmen  and  Divines  judge  in  the  Point ,  though  the  two 
former  placed  too  much  of  tt  in  the  AlTent :  )  but  where  and 
how  oft  do  you  find  the  word  [_Heart']  ufed  for  the  fole  Intel- 
lect? I  pray  fticw  the  place.  2.  The  proverbial  fpecch  [.rvith 
all  the  Heart]  is  not  ufed  in  Rem,  10.  lO.  but  only  the  fubjecc 
barely  cxpreffsd  :  vcth  the  HcArt  mAn  believethto  Rtghteouf- 

Mtfs. 

r  My  third  Argument  (as  you  place  it)  was  to  another  ufe, 

'  which  is  of  lefi  moment.  As  I  judge  Faith  to  be  taken,  1  .foriic- 
timcs  more  ftrictly  for  meer  Aflent  to  a  Teftimony  :  (fo  f,imet 
takcsit  when  he  faith,  the  Devils  believe  J  2.  And  fometimes 
more  fully  for  Aflent  and  Acceptance,  or  Confent  :  (fo  PauI 
cakesit;  and  foitjuftifieth.)  So  3.  Ifuppofeit  isfometimc 
taken  moft  largely  and  improperly,  for  the  full  performance  of 
the  conditions  of  the  New  Covenant.  If  any  deny  this,!  have 
no  mind  to  contend  for  it,  becaufc  it  is  but  about  a  word,  and 
not  the  thing-  Your  anfwer  is  twofold  ;  i.  //;4/ Heb.  5.  9. 
ffeakj  of  obeying  Chrift-,  but  doth  not  call  faith  obeying  Chrifi. 
r  Reply.  That  Obedience  which  conraineth  the  Condit  on  of 
falvation  by  Chrift  Cwhercof  Juftification  is  a  party/  muft  needs 
include  Faith  :  But  the  word  Obedience  Heb.$  9  concaineth 
theconditionoffalvationbyChrill;  thcr  foreit  irciuJes  fa.th, 
H^  is  become  the  Author  of  Eternal  falvation  to  alt  them  that 
obey  him. 

Your  fecond  anfwer  is,  "^It  may  be  obedience  by  ^ffent^  that 
Chrift  is  t he  A<!eJltah^  died,  rofe,  Sec.'}  Rep!»  i  If  Obedience 
of  theer  AlTent  be  not  made  the  condition  o*^  Htcrnal  falvati- 
on in  Scripture ,  then  it  is  not  that  obedi  nee  which  is  here 
mentioned:  But  the  former  is  true :  therefo»o  the  latt^^r.  2.Thc 
firft  Aflent  to  thefe  Gofpel  Truths  is  not  in  a  full  proper  fence 
calledObedicncetoChrift  fttall :  therefoie  not  here  to  be  fo 

kiHidcrftood.   As  fubjcction,  fo  obedience  is  a  term  of  Relatir 
oa  n 


(5-58) 


on  fuppofing  the  Authority  of  a  Superior,  the  acknowledge- 
ment of  that  Authority,  A  command  from  that  Supccior^and 
that  the  a<^ion  be  therefore  done  bccaufe  fo  commanded. Now 
the  firft  AfTent  to,o'r  acknowlcdgemcnc  of  the  Redeemers  Of- 
fice and  Soveraignty.muft  needs  in  order  of  Nature  precede  all 
obedience  to  him  as  a  iS*overaign.  I  confefs  improperly  a  man 
may  be  faid  to  obey  j  when  he  yields  to  the  Reafon  and  pcrfwa- 
fion  of  another;  but  this  wants  the  very  form  of  obedience  pro- 
perly fo  called.  If  it  be  true  that  the  firft  Acccpcahccof  Chrift 
for  our  Soveraign  as  Redeemer,  by  the  Wilis  confenr,  may  be 
both  the  Reception  of  him  for  King,  and  Obedience  to  him  .- 
Yet  in  order  of  Nature  it  is  refpectively  a  Reception  firft  ; 
though  in  time  it  is  both  at  once-  But  the  firft  Affent  to  Chrifts 
Sovereignty  cannot  be  an  obeying  him  as  Soveraign.    And  for 
the  underftanding  the  Text,  when  I  find  Chrift  give  the  world, 
a  fyfteme  of  Precepts,  and  tell  them  that  he  is  become  the  Au- 
thor of  Eternal  Salvation  to  all  them  that  obey  hi/a ,  I  dare 
not  without  Reafon  reflrain  that  obedience  (in  the  fence  of  it) 
to  fome  one  or  two  acts :  Efpecially  when  I  find  that  he  hath 
made  the  like  proroife  on  condition  of  other  acts  of  ours  bc- 
lides  Believing  ;   as  in  many  Text  1  have  (hewed  in  ihofe  A- 
phor.    Take  mjjoij  and  burden^  &c.     Learn  of  me  to  be  meek. 
And  lowly ^  &c.  and  i  '^illeafe  you^  and  je  (hall  find  re(i  :  For- 
give and  ye  fballbeforgtven.    He  that  confejftth  and  forfaktth 
bid  Jin  Jhallhave  mercy  ^mtb  multitudes  of  the  like.  And  Rom* 
I  o.  that  is  called  Faith,  ver.  14, 17.  which  is  called  obeying  the 
ge/fel,  ver.i^.    And  if  the  Gofpel  do  as  directly  and  urgent- 
ly command  ^cnfent  as  AJfeMt;ye&  if  it  command  love  to  Chrift 
as  of  equal  neceility  with  both,  I  have  reafon  to  think  that  in 
this  large  fence,  Faith  includes  it.     Why  (hould  ikejing  the 
Qofpel,  tad  obeying  the  Truths  be  made  Synonima*s  with  Belie- 
ving as  it  is  one  fingle  Act,  when  the  Gofpel  commands  many 
other  Acts  as  of  xquai  necefiity  and  excellency  }  Let  me  ar- 
gue thus  tx  concejjts  Jrom  your  felf  and  others.    Moft  Divinei 
affirm  that  the  proper  Reafon  why  Faith  juftifieth,  is  itsKela- 
tion  to  Chrift  ;  becaufe  it  is  a  Receiving  of  him  (\i  juftifies  Re- 
lative i.e.  A  Chrift  received  Juftifies .- )  but  Mr.Tembes con- 
fciTeth  that  other  Graces  receive  Chrift  as  well  as  Faith:  there- 

fore 


(5^9) 


fore  other  Graces  Juftific  as  well  as  Faith.   The  Confequencc 
is  a  Q^atenus  adOntfte. 

What  i^-m-i^w  and  '^^!^^>s^«' import  in  their  firft  flgnificati- 
on,  is  notcoourbufiners  io  much  as  in  what  fcnfe  theyace 
commonly  ufcd  :  Nodoubc  they  may  fignifie  properly  our 
yielding  to  pcrfwafion,  improperly  called  Obeying:  but  that 
they  arc  put  for  proper  Obeying  ufually  in  Scripture,  moft  In- 
terpreters affirm.  You  may  therefore  as  well  draw  to  your 
purpofe  the  Latin  Ohedire,  becaufe  it  is  but  (JuaJI  oh-aHdire. 
Indeed  the  Obedience  to  a  Teacher  (  as  to  Chrift  and  his  Mir 
nifters,  and  of  Scholars  to  tlieiv  Matter  j  who  ufech  both  Ar- 
gument and  Authority,  is  fully  and  fitly  expreflcd  in  thofe 
words.  The  word  []  Gofpel  j  if  principally  fpoken  of  the  Doc- 
trine of  Good  tidirigs  or  Mercy  by  Chrift(  but  furc  not  only 
of  the  Hiftorical  or  DecUracory  part,  but  alib^  yea  principally 
of  ths  Fromifeor  Off-T  :  )  but  the  whole  New  Covenant  or 
Z<jtt'  of  Chrift  (  for  fo  ir  is,  and  fo  the  Ancients  unaminoufly 
call  St)  containing  Precepts  and  Threatningsalfo,  is  called  his 
Teftament,  Covenant,  Gofpel,  being  fo  denominated  from 
the  more  excellent  part^  //f^.7. 18,19,22.  ThtTeJi^nment  of 
Jefy.s  is  oppofed  to  the  Commanime»ts  of  tht  Lavf,  and  called 
Better:  therefore iccompriztth  Chrfts  Commands,  proper 
to  him.  And  is  it  not  Chrifts  whole  Law  which  is  of  force 
when  he  is  dead, and  called  his  Jf'i'rtw^Mf .?  Hih.g.i'j,  And 
when  the  Apoftle  faith,  Thty  rvere  wAde  ablt  iMinifiers  of  the 
NeW  Teftament^  doth  he  mean  only  of  tht  Hifiory^  or  the 
Precept  of  faith,  and  not  of  Love,Hopey  Kjpentanct^  ^i.  Let 
!iis  preaching  witnefs,  as  the  Expofitors,  (  1  Cor  3  .6.)  Or 
let  Chrift  in  giving  them  their  Commiflion  tell  you  what  that 
New TefiAtnent  is, Mat. 2^.  Go  Dtfciple  .ill  N:tio»St  &c.  teach- 
ing  them  to  t>bfervs  tdl  things  ^hat  ever  I  command.  And  not 
to  ftrive  abour  words,  you  know  that  New  Law  of  Chrift, 
which  is  called  his  Teftament,  Cov?nar.t,Gofpel,(^c.  hath  all 
the  Precepts  in  it  which  you  mention.  I  sit  not  Precepts  as 
well  as  Narrations  which  Murl^  c^Wi  \}\&  Qofpl,  Mar.i.i.  ? 
Was  it  not  the  Gofpel  which  Chrift  and  the  Apoftles  preach- 
ed ?  And  they  preached  Eepentance  and  Fath,  and  fo  com- 
manded Duty  :  If  a  man  loofe  his  Life  for  publifliing  or  obeyS 

Bbb  ing 


(57o) 

ing  Chrifts  Prectpts,  doth  not  the  Promife  belong  to  him, 
M-ir,^.-^$.  and  1029?  Oristhat  Promife  to  them  onlythar 
foffer  f>r  the  D/c/./r^rjz;^  part  only  ?  IscheCiJy'/?^/ thatmuft 
bf  p'jb'i^vj  2mcn^  all Ni\tions,  the  Hifiorj  only  ?  cJ^/dr.i 3 . 
10  Was  the  Precept  of  Accept' ngChrif}  gloving  himinfin- 
cerity  and  obeying  him  c^c,  no  part  of  that  Gofpelito  which 
Paul  Ma's  (eparar'jd  ?  /?<>  w.  r  .i.in  which  hefcrvedm  iy/^/WfjVer. 
9  of  which  he  was  not  afliimed,  ^'>'/-.  16.  and  which  be  was 
fut  in  t> «?  \V/j'/r  I  T^Jcjf  2  2,4.  Was  it  only  the  1)ecUration 
of  Chrifts  Death, Refurrection.d'-.  which  is  the  Gofpel  ac- 
cording to  which  wens  fecrets  ntufi  be  judged  }  Rom.z.  l6.  Of 
according  to  which  the ^^w/  are  enemin,  Rom»ii.  28.  com- 
pared with  Z,«i^.i  9.27.  Isnotitlat^lycr  takep,"iCflr.8  18? 
And  fubjection  to  the  Gofpel  implies  it  preceptive,  2  Cor.  g, 
I?.  *Pff^n  withdrawing  and  feparating  from  the  uncircum- 
ciHor},  and  fearing  the  Jews,and  diffembling,  and  Sarndbas 
with  himV  was  A  not  w^ik'"g  according  to  the  Truth  of  the  Qof- 
pel,  Gal.z.i^-  The  felfeApoftlcs  preached  another  Gofpel, 
and  the  GaUthidns  turned  to  another  Gofpei^  when  the  former 
preached,  and  the  later  received  theDoftrine  of  the  Neceffi- 
ty  ofbiing  circftmcifed^  and  kjephg  Moks  Z«<w,  G^/.  1.6,7. 
fo  that  the  word  [  Tejiament  ]  and  ^  Goffd  J  includes  Laws  or 
Precepts  of  Duty. 

4.  Tothatof  thcfenfeof  C/d/.  %i2  23.  aboutthe  largeft 
extent  of  the  word  Fakh^  it  being  as  I  faid,  of  fofraall  mo- 
ment, I  intend  not  to  infift  on  it.  My  meaning  is  but  this ; 
that  fome  other  Graces  are  intended  redudively,and  the  chief 
named  for  all.  But  by  your  anfwer  I  underftand,  1.  That 
you  take  not  faith  to  be  the  whole  fulfilling  of  the  condition 
of  the  New  Covenant  .-  which  conceflion  (hall  facisfieme, 
what  ever  you  think  of  the  fenfe  of  the  Word,  or  thefe  Texts. 
2. but  the  reft  of  your  Anf.I  am  unfatisficd  in  You  fay[^7  Faith 
onlj  the  condition  of  the  Covtnant  concerning  fujfificaiton  in  thui 
Lift  ii  ftti^lled :  not  cancer ning  every  benefit  of  the  Ne"^  Cove- 
ttHKt  :  Repentance  is  the  condition  tf  Remifjionof  fns  '.forgivi- 
ing  others,  doing  goid  to  the  Saints  ^oj  entering  into  Life.~\  Refl. 
I.  YoQ  know  that  not  tVotton  and  many  great  Divines  of 
Eng/^nd  only,  but  of  the  moft  famous  Tranfmarine,  do  take 


(370 


fii/itfic^tion  and  Rem'Jftm  to  be  one  and  the  fame  thing.  I  have 
received  Animadverfions  from  divers  Icsrned  Divines  lately 
onthefeAphorifnis ,  and  three  or  four  of  chenfi  h!?^mcraefoc 
making  any  difference  between  J  uftification  and  Remif^on  ; 
chough  1  make  as  little  as  may  be.  And  can  you  think  then 
chat  Remiffion and JuftiHcacion  havefeveral  conditions?  If 
theyarenot  wholly  the  fame,  yet  doubtlefs  the  difference  is 
exceeding  fmall,  and  raihcrnotional  then  real.  The  fame 
Comminationofthe  Law  doth  both  condemn  and  oblige  to 
panilhment.  Rcmiflfion  is  a  difcharge  from  the  obligation  to 
PuniOiraenr- and  Juftiiication  is  a  difcharge  from  the  condem- 
nation. So  much  then  a«  that  Obligation  to  Punifliment , 
differs  from  th^  Laws  condemnation,  (  which  \i  nothing,or  fo 
little  as  it  is  not  obvious  to  bedifccrned)  fo  much  doth  Rc- 
miflion  differ  from  Juftification.  Yea  even  thofe  Divines 
that  in  pleading  for  the  intereft  o'f  the  aftive  Righteoufnefs  to 
Juftification,  do  to  that  end  make  Juftifjcation  to  have  two 
parts;  yet  one  of  thcm,rticy  fay, isRcnr,ifsion<j/yi^;  as  the 
other  is  the  Imfutatlon  of  Ktghttcnfr.tfs.  And  I  pray  how 
then  can  thefe  two  par:?  of  the  fame  Juftification  have  two  di  - 
vers  conditions,  fo  as  one  is  appropriated  to  one.  and  excluded 
from  the  other  ?  I  remember  no  reformed  Divines,  but  they 
cither  make  Juftification  and  Remifsion  to  be  all  one ;  or 
Remifsion  to  be  part  of  Juftification,  orelfe  to  be  two  Rela- 
tions ^  or  other  effeds^  immediately  and  at  once  (  in  order 
of  time,  if  not  of  nuure  )  refulting  or  proceeding  from  the 
fime  foundation  (  materially  )  or  other  caufe.  Though  Ga' 
tdker  and  Brad/ha^  make  them  to  differ,  it  is  but  in  this  nar- 
row (  and  almaft  unconceivable  vl^y  )  but  in  time  to  concur. 
I  muft  therfore  differ  from  you  in  thisj  that  they  have  divers 
conditions :  and  wait  for  your  proof  of  it.  But  it  fee  ms  you 
will  give  us  leave  to  fay,  A  man  is  not  parJoKtdh  faith  omIj; 
And  yet  he  iij'^fiified  hj  faith  ontj  !  and  that  a<:  a  condition  I 
Faith  then  it  feemscando  the  whole,  but  not  one  half  (as 
fomc  judge )or  can  dojtnd  not  do  the  fame  thing'as  other?.  ^ 
2.  But  do  vou  think  that  Repentance  is  not  neceffarily 
jinttecdent  to  fuffificatian,  as  well  as  to  Remijfion  ?  If  you  fay 
No  j  the  current  of  the  Gofpel- Doftrine  will  confute  you  : 

B  b  b  2  which 


(37^ 


which  ufually  pucteth  Repentance  before  Faich  :  and  chofe 
Divines  chat  fay  it  followech  after  it,  do  yet  make  them  con- 
cur in  order  of  time.     But  if  Repentance  do  neceflTarily  pre- 
cede Juilihcation,  C  as  I  doubt  no:  but  you  will  yield  J  then 
let  me  know  to  what  purpofCjOr  under  what  notion  or  refpcd, 
if  not  as  a  Condition?  Can  you  find  any  lower  place  to  give 
it  ?    3.    But  if  you  fliouid  mean  that  Faich  and  Repentance 
are  the  condision  of  our  firft  Juftification  and  Remiff  ion,  but 
afterwards  only  of  our  Remilsion.  I  Anfwer,    i.  According 
to  your  Judgement  ('who  take  Juftification  to  be  one  ad  tran- 
fient,  once  only  performed ,  and  neither  a  continned  Ad  ,  nor 
renewed,  or  repeated,  )  neither  Faith  nor  Repentance  after- 
wards performed.are  any  conditions  of  our  Juftification  in  this 
I  ife.     This  may  fcem  a  heavy  charge,  but  it  is  a  plain  Truth. 
F  r  that?  Juftification  which  we  receive  upon  our  firft  believing 
hath  only  tha:  firft  Ad  of  faith  for  its  condition  ( or  as  others 
fpeak,  its  Inftrumental  caufe  )  We  arc  not  juftificd  to  day  by 
that  ad  of  Faith,  which  we  fhall  perform  to  Morrow,  or  a 
Twelvemonth  hencejfo  that  according  to  your  opinion,and  all 
that  go  chat  way,  it  is  only  one  (the  firft)  Adof  Faicb  which 
juftifies;  and  allihefoilowing  Ads  through  our  whole  life, 
do  no  more  to  our  Juftification>then  the  works  of  the  Law  do. 
I  would  many  other  Divines  that  go  your  way  (  for  it  is  com- 
mon as  to  the  difpatching  of  Juftification  by  tneAd)  would 
think  of  this  foul  abfurdicy.     (  You  may  add  this  aifo  to 
wbac  is  faid  before,  againft  your  opinion  herein, )  Where  then 
is  the  Old  Dodrine  of  the  jetfi  living  b)  faith^  ^  to  ^uJitficA' 
tion  ?    J  may  bear  with  thefe  men  (  or  at  Jcaft,  need  not  won- 
der, )  for  not  adinicting  Obedience  or  ocher  Graces  to  be 
conditions  of  Juttification  as  continued,  when  they  will  not 
admit  faith  i  t  felf.     Who  fpeaks  more  againft  faith,they  or  I  ? 
V/hen  I  admit  as  necefTary  that  firft  ad,  and  maintain  the  ne- 
cefsicy  of  repeated  ads,  to  our  continued  Juftification^  and 
they  exclude  all  fave  one  Inftantancous  ad?  2.  And  what  rea- 
fon  can  any  mm  give,  why  Repentance  (hould  be  admitted 
as  a  condition  of  our  firft  Juftification,  and  yet  be  no  condi- 
tion of  the  continuance  of  it  ?  or  what  proof  is  therefrom 
Scripture  for  this  1 1  (hall  prove  chat  the  continuance  of  our 

Jaftf- 


(373) 


Juftification  hath  more  to  its  condition  then  the  beginning-, 
(  though  learned  men,  I  know  gain-fay  it :  )  but  farcly  lefs  ic 
cannot  have. 

4.  But  why  do  you  fay  only  of  Repentance  that  ^it  U  the 
ccndttion  of  Remiffion'2  and  of  forgiving  othtrs,  that  {^it  is  the 
condition  ofentring  into  life?  ~\  Have  you  not  Chr?fts  exprefs 
words,  \.\\2X  forgiving  ethers  is  a  condition  of  our  Rem^ffion  ?  if 
ye  forgive  men  their  trefpajfes^  your  heavenly  Father  vill  forgive 
jou;  but  if  you  forgive  not  men^tiQ.  Nay,  is  not  Reformation 
and  Obedience  ordinarily  made  a  condition  ct  forgivenep  ?  I 
refer  you  to  the  Texts  cited  in  my  Aphorifms :  iVaflijou^  wake 
jof*  clean,  put  away  the  evil  of  jour  doings  ^Siz  then  if  your  fins  be 
M  crimf'^n^Sic.  He  that conftjfeth  andforf^ktth  hUfin^fhaU  htvt 
mercy .  And  I  would  have  ic  confidered,  if  Remiftion  and  ]  u- 
ftification  be  either  the  fame,  or  fo  neer  as  all  Divines  make 
them,  whether  it  be  poflible,  that  forgiving  others ,  and  Re- 
format on  or  new  Obedience  (hould  be  a  condition  of  the  con- 
tinuance or  renewal  of  a  pardoning  A6t,  and  not  of  Juftifica- 
tion ?  DoubtlefSjthe  general  Juftibcation  muft  be  continued, 
as  well  as  the  general  pardon  :  and  a  particular  Juftification  I 
think  after  particular  fins,  is  needfullaswell  as  particular  par- 
don :  orifchenameiliould  bethought  improper,  the  thing 
cannot  be  denyed.  Judicious  5^y7 faith  as  much  as  1  (yet  men 
were  not  fo  angry  with  him,)  Treat,  of  Covenant,  pag.  20.21. 
[^A  difpojition  to  good  ^rks  u  necejfary  to  fpt^i^cation^  being  the 
(qualification  of  ana^ive  lively  faith.  Good  worlds  of  all  fotts 
art  neceffary  to  our  cor,tinunnce  in  the  fiate  of  fu^ifcation ,  and 
fo  to  ourdml  AhfoluiionJfGod^iveopportriyiity  :  bu'they  are 
not  theciufe  of^  but  only  a  precedent  ejtiJilification  or  condition  to 
final forgivenefs  aid  Eternal blifs.'^  And  pag. 21  •  \This  rvalh^- 
ing  in  the  light  as  he  u  inth  light,  is  that  qualiflrAticn  whereby 
we  become,  tmmectiat/y  capable  ef  Chrifls  Righteoufnefs^or  aSlual 
participants  of  his  propitiation^  X^hich  a  the  fcle  immediate  aufe 
of  our  Juftificatio?*^  taken  for  Remi/Jlon  of  fins  or  adtial  Appro- 
bAiioH  with  God.  ]  And  pag.  73.  [  fVorkjthen,  or  apurpofe  to 
walk  with  Qod,  jnfli\ie  oitke  pajfive  (jttaJification  cfthefubjeH 
capable  ofjufiification,  or  as  the  qualficationofthiit  faith  which 
y^/lifittb.^  So  he, 

Bbb  3  5. How 


C374-) 


5-  How  will  you  ever  prove,tiiac  o\itEntering  into  Lift^mi 
our  continued  remijfion  or  Juftification  htva  not  che  famecon- 
dicions?chat  chofe  Graces  are  excluded  from  one  which  belong 
to  theother.lndced  the  men  that  are  for  Faiths  Inftrumcnta- 
lity,  fay  fomewhac  to  it  ^  but  what  you  can  lay ,  I  know  not. 
And  for  them,  if  they  could  prove  Faith  Inftruraental  in  juHi- 
fying  to  nomine^  becaufe  it  receives  Chrift  by  whom  we  are  ju- 
ftified  ;  they  would  alfo  prove  it  the  Inftrumenc  of  Glorify- 
ing,  becaufe  it  Receives  Chrift  by  and  for  whom  we  are  faved 
and  Glorined.  And  fo  if  the  Inftrumentality  of  Faith  muft 
exclude  obedience  from  juftifying  us ,  it  muft  alfo  exclude  ic 
from  Glorifying  us.  And  I  marvel  that  they  are  fj  loofe  and 
ealie  in  admitting  obedience  into  the  work  of  faving,  and  yen 
not  of  continuing  or  confumraating  Juftiftcation.when  the  A- 
poftle  faith,  "S;  Grace je  are  faved,  by  Faith^  Sec  ;  and  fo  ex- 
cludes obedience  from  Salvation  in  tkQ  general  as  much  as  he 
any  where  doth  from  Juftification  in  particular. 

6.  But  laftly,  I  take  what  you  grant  me  in  this  Sedion,  and 
profefs  that  I  think  in  effe^  you  grant  me  the  main  of  the  caufe 
that  I  ftand  upon.  For,  as  you  grant,  i.  That  faith  is  not 
the  whole  condition  of  the  Covenant.  2.  That  Repentance  alfo  U 
the  condition  of  Remiffion  (which  is  near  the  fame  with  Juftifica- 
tion.) 3 .  That  obedience  u  the  condition  of  glorification  (which 
hath  the  fame  conditions  with  final  and  continued  Juftificati- 
on.^ 4.  So  you  feem  to  yield  all  this ,  as  to  our  fall  jt*flifi- 
cation  at  Judgement,  For  you  purpofely  limit  the  conditiona- 
•!ity  of  meet  faith  to  our  Juflification  in  this  Life.  Hut  if  you 
yield  all  that  I  defirc  ('as  you  do,  if  I  underftand  you.)  as  to 
the  laft  juftification  at  Judgement ,  then  we  are  not  much  dif- 
fering in  this  bull  nef .  For  I  take  (  as  Mr .  Burges  doth,  Lett. 
ofJufiificuttoH  zpjourcomplcateftand  moftpcrf^d Juftifica- 
tion to  be  that  at  Judgement.  Yea,  and  that  it  is  fo  eminent 
andconfiderablehcre,  thati  think  all  other  Juftification  is  fo 
called  chiefly  as  referring  to  that.  And  me  thinks  above  all  men, 
you  fliould  fay  fo  too,  who  make  Juftification  to  lie  only  in 
fententitJHdicid^  and  not  in  fententia  Legu  \  And  foall  that  go 
your  way  (as  many  that  I  meet  with  do.)  If  ihen  we  are  jufti- 
ficd  at  Cjods  great  Tribunal  at  Judgement,  by  obedience  as 

the 


07  T) 


the  feconderypsrt  of  the  condition  of  the  CoYfinant  (\\hu:ifi 
youfcemto  yicldj  i.  We  are  agreed  in  the  main.  2.  I  can- 
not y^t  believe  rhat  our  J  uPiiHcaticn  at  that  i3ar  hath  one  con- 
dition, and  our  Juftification  in  Law  (or  in  this  Life ,  as  conti- 
iiued)anothcr.  He  thatdyeth  juftiHed,wa$ro)ufttfied  inchc 
hour  of  "tiying,  on  the  fame  conditions  as  he  muft  be  at  f  udge- 
ment.  For  i .  1  here  are  no  conditions  to  be  performed  after 
death.  2.  Stntentia  Ltfii  tfr  (t-UrAia  jueliciado  juftitie  on 
the  fame  terms.  Add  to  all  this  what  I  grant  to  you,  [that  our 
fu/iificationVfJsen  firfi  begun  here,  is  by  faith  {fuppofni  Repev 
fance)  before  und  ■K'ithoHt  tht praUict  ofobtdience^]  and  then  fee 
4iownear  we  are. 

The  fifth  Argument  which  you  mention, is  grounded  on  the 
common  Maxim, T^n  eji  dtfJinguenoiHm  uhi  Lex  tion  Mflinguitt 
and  runs  thus:  If  the  Scripture  in  propounding  to  man  the 
adacquate  Ob jed  of  jufltfying  Faith,  (thrift)  do  not  divide 
Chnft,  and  fay,  |  /»  believing  him  to  be  a  Pritji  ,  your  faith  « 
juflifjingybut  not  inbelifvifighim  to  be  King,  or  Prophet^  cr 
Head^  but  propoundeth  Chrift  undivided  as  this  Objed  ^ 
then  muft  not  we  diftinguifh  or  divide,  but  take  Chrift  entire- 
ly for  the  objVd:  of  juftifying  Faith.  But  the  Scripture  doth 
not  divide  or  diftinguifh  in  this  cafe:,  therefore  we  muft  not.  It 
is  Chrift  that  muft  be  Received,ancl  believed  in  :  but  a  Saviour 
and  not  a  King,is  not  Chrift.  It  is  Chriil  as  Chrift.  His  very 
Name  fignifieth  as  diredly  bis  Kingly  office  ac  leaft  ,  as  his 
Prieftly.  And  if  you  confcfs  that  the  fame  ad  of  Faith  ac  the 
fame  inftant  Receives  Chrift  both  as  Prieft  and  King ,  then  I 
ihall  ftay  my  aflent  to  your  opinion  till  you  bring  me  the  Scri- 
pture that  faith,  it  is  faith  in  this  notion  ;  a  ui  not  in  that  rphch 
jufiifies.  God  fpeaks  plainly  that  "^hofotvtrbilieveth  p^all  be 
jttftified  from  allthings^^Q.  /  nd  you  confcfs  this  'Bilitving  is 
the  Receiving  Chrift  for  King  and  Priefi ;  and  that  it  juftifies  as 
a  condition ;  and  doth  not  your  (unproved  j  diftindion  over- 
throw  this  again } 

Thcfixth  Argument  which  you  mention,  runs  thus  -.  if 
Scripture  particularly  propound  Chrift  as  King,  as  the  Objed 
of  juftifying  Faith,  then  Chrift  as  King  is  the  objed  of  it:  But 
Scripture  doth  fo  :  Ergo  ^c.  I  have  named  you  fomc  places 
where  it  fo  doth ,  a  little  before.  The 


(3^^) 


Thefcventhis  to  the  fame  purpofe  with  the  fifth.  You 
nimetwo  icxtsas  proving  thac  Scripture  cyeth  juftification 
to  the  Receipt  of  Chrift  as  Pricft  only  :  But  there  is  not  a  word 
intheTexcstoihatend. /?o»»3.25.  fpeaks  of  Faith  in  Chrifts 
blood,  but  not  a  word  for  excluding  Faith  in  his  Obedience, 
Refurredion,  Interccilion,  or  Power,  much  lefs  excluding  our 
confent  CO  his  full  Authority  or  Office.  The  word  [Only'^  is 
not  in  the  Text-  You  may  as  well  fay,that  it  is  ^onlj]  by  faith 
inhisiV<iw^,  and  fo  not  inhu  b^eo^^  becaufe  other  fexts  fay, 
it  it  hy  faith  in  h^  N4me,  See  A5{s  13.16.  The  other  Text, 
Rom.^.g.  fpeaks  neither  a  word  of  F^ith^  nor  excludes  Chrifts 
ebedttnce  (  by  which  many  are  made  Righteom  )  nor  RefurreSii' 
en  (  for  he  Rofe  again  [or  our  Jnfiif  cation.)  nor  hij  Intercefiofiy 
(  for  who  fjall  eondemn  ui  ?  it  is  Chriji  that  tiied ,  yea  rather 
that  Rofe  again,  and  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God ,  Vcho  alfo 
ntaketh  Interctfftnnjor  tu,  Rom. 8- 34.)  And  all  theft  parts  of 
Chrifts  Prieftly  Office  muft  be  excluded,  if  you  will  affix  the 
word  [0»iy']  to  the  Text,  which  faith ,  we  are  jufiififd  by  hi* 
blood.  Indeed  you  make  fo  a  quick  difpatch  in  the  Controver- 
fie  about  the  adive  and  paflive  Righteoufncfs. 

The  fame  anfwer  ferves  to  what  you  fay  in  the  eighth,  and 
ninch,and  tenth,bcing  the  fame  with  that  yoB  fay  here.  I  mar- 
vail  how  you  would  form  an  Argument  from  2  Cor.5  2  i.GaL 
a.  2 1  1  Where  you  fay.     Obedience  is  not  an  ejfentitl  part  of 
Faith,   I  yield  Jt  willingly,  taking  Faith  properly  and  ftridly, 
and  not  in  the  largefl  improper  fenfe.   Bac  that  it  juftifies  as 
immediatly  as  It  Rcceivctb  him  asKing.asit  doth  in  Receiving 
him  asPrieft,  I  (hall  take  for  proved  ,  till  you  prove  the  law- 
fulncfsherc  of  dividing  Chrift, and  Faith,ordiftingnifliing,and 
appropriating  juftifying  to  one  refpcd,  and  excluding  another 
in  the  fame  ad  of  Believing,  and  the  fame  Objed  Chrift,  And 
to  what  is  faid  before,  let  mc  yet  add  this,    i .  If  Chrift  be  not 
received  as  a  true  compleat  Saviour,  except  he  be  Received  as 
King,  then  Faith  juftifies  not  as  it  Receiveth  him  for  Piieft 
only  :  ffor  you  here  confefs  that  he  jurtifies  as  he  is  Received 
as  a  Saviour.)  But  the  Antecedent  is  evident :  for  as  King  he 
faveth  hij  people  from  ftn  and  Satan^  and  all  their  enemies. 
Srgo^  (-re. 

z.  If 


(577) 


2,  If  Chrift  as  King  do  juftifie  us,  then  he  rauft  be  Received 
as  King  to  Juftification.  But  the  former  is  undenyable,  Afat. 
25.  &C'  Er^o,  c^e.  The  Confequence  is  raifed  on  your  own 
Grounds. 

The  eleventh  Argument  ^as  you  number  J  doth  fuppore  k- 
veral  points  (  very  weighty  with  me  ,  which  I  undertake  to 
make  good  j  which  do  overthrow  the  unfound  grounds  which 
the  contrary  minded  go  upon.  i.  I  fuppofe  that  Fai^  ju- 
ftifieth  principally  ex  VotMntatt  ordinaHtii-,  and  not  ex  vatttra 
a6fu4  •  though  it  have  AftitttcHyiem  <id  cfficium  ii  ipfa  ret  «4- 
tHra .  2.  I  fuppofe  Chrift  is  firft  received  by  Faith  ,  and  his 
Benefits  come  with  him ,  and  in  order  of  narure  are  after 
the  Receiving  of  him.  Thcfe  things  being  fuppcfcdjt  ftrong- 
^y  perfwades  me,  that  the  entertainment  of  Chrift  as  King, was 
neverintended  by  God  to  be  excluded  from  the  conditional 
Intereft  in  Juftification,  when  I  find  in  Scripture  that  his  own 
Dominion  was  an  end  of  his  Death,  Refurredion  and  Revi- 
ving ,  and  that  God  doth  fo  infift  on  this  point ,  to  bring 
the  world  tofubjedion  to  Chrift,  Tfaim  2.  &c.  And  that 
thchonouring  and  advancing  of  God  the  Father,  and  the  Me- 
diator God- man,  isthemoft  Noble  excellent  ufe  ofour  faith. 
Is  it  then  any  whit  probable  that  it  is  Gods  meaning  to  exclude 
this  refpeft  of  the  aft  from  any  corditionalif  y  herein  ?  Shatl 
I  again  tel!  you  the  true  ground  of  mens  raiflake  Cas  I  thinkj 
in  this  Point?  They  look  on  Faith  as  if  it  were  a  natural  Re- 
ception, and  did  make  the  thing  received  theirs  immediatly 
aud  formally,  as  it  is  fuch  a  Receiving  ix  natHrareif  and  not 
as  it  is  Receptio  worafij  whofe  cff-d  depends  wholly  on,  and 
its  efficacy  or  Intereft  is  derived  directly  from  the  Will,  Con- 
ftitution  or  Ordination  of  theLeg  flatorand  Donor,  and  fo 
doch  what  it  doth  as  a  condition  in  Law- fence.  And  I  pray 
fearch,  whether  in  this  Queftion,  you  do  not  confound  youp 
Notions  ex  parte  objiEli,  and  ex  parte  ACtm  ?  Let  me  con- 
clude all  by  the  Ijluftration  of  my  former  fimilltude.  A  wo- 
man condemned  for  Treafon,  is  Ranfomed  by  the  Prince,  who 
Decreeth,  that  if  fhc  will  Believe  that  he  is  her  Redeemer,  and 
will  take  him  as  her  M  after.  Redeemer  and  Husband,  (he  fliall 
be  Delivered  and  made  his  Princefs;  elfe  Hot.     Now  the 

Ccc  queftion, 


078) 


queflionis,  what  is  thecondicionqf  this  womsns  deirvcrance 
and  Dignity?  Is  the  condition  of  her  Deliverance  and  Par- 
dt>n,  the  taking  him  only  under  the  Notion  of  a  Pardoner  or 
Deliverer  ?  And  is  the  condition  of  her  D;gnify,  only  the 
Taking  li  im  as  a  Pi  ince  who  is  Rich  and  Hon  uurabic  e  No  ; 
The  condition  on  her  part  ,  is  the  Taking  him  entirely  to  all 
thcfe  ul'cs,  or  in  all  thcfe  RefpeSs.and  more  ;  even  the  marry- 
ing him,  and  covenanting  to  be  his,  as  a  faithfull  fpoufe  and 
Subjed  ;  and  firft  acknowledging  what  he  bath  done  for  her 
freedom  and  advancement,  then  co  take  him  for  her  Husband 
and  Lord,  that  hath  done  this  to  advance  and  free  her.  And 
while  (he  is  faithfull  .to  this  marriage  covenant,  in  the  perform- 
ance, (he  (hall  enjoy  thefe  Benefits  :  but  if  (he  forfake  hiirj 
and  choofc  another,  as  with  him  (he  received  her  Dignity,  (o 
with  him  (he  (hall  lofe  them  all.  So  that  ex  parte  aHiu  here 
is  no  room  for  your  ^ttateniu  and  S^inguifhing,  But  now  if 
the  Queftion  be  intended  not  ex  furte  ^Qus,ov,  what  is  the 
condition  on  her  part,  but  only  what  is  it  in  him  that  (he  re- 
ceives for  her  Huiband,which  doth  deliver  her  ?  Why  then  we 
fay,  ic  is  his  Ranfom ,  his  love  and  free  mercy, ^r  And  if  the 
Qaeftionbe,whac  iskinhimthacdignifiethher  ?  Why  I  fay, 
it  IS  his  Dignity  and  Riches  of  which  fhc  participateth  j  toge- 
ther with  the  fame  his  free  mercy  as  the  JropuHivecaufe,  And 
fo  (he  is  Dignified  by  Receiving  or  marrying  him  qtiattnui  a 
Prince,rich  and  Honourable,  and  not  quatenm  a  Redeemer  on- 
ly :  and  (he  IS  delivered  by  taking  him  as  a  Deliverer  or  Re- 
deemer, and  not  as  an  honourable  Prince.  The  meaning  of 
all  thfs  IS  no  more,but  that  he  doth  not  redeem  her  as  a  r'rince, 
nor  dignifieher  under  the  notion  of  a  Redeemer .-  and  fo  on 
biS  parr  you  may  Aifttngnfl).  But  yet  as  to  the  conditicnality 
on  her  part,,  there  is  no  room  for  dtflirgm  fixing  at  all.  For 
is  not  this  all  that  Paul  ayms  at  in  fpcaking  fo  oft  of  Faith  in 
Relation  to  Cbnfts  death  and  Righteoufnefs,  rather  then  to 
his  Government?  to  note  {jekai  i»  Cy^fi^f'^^^^'^^^'^^^  i^fti', 
f,e~]  rather  then  [ychatriffuClofoHraEloffnth  is  the  ccvditi' 
0*}  .<' JAnd  may  not  this  tend  to  an  sccomm  )darion  between  us 
in  thiS  Point  ?  efpecially  with  thofe  Divines  chat  fay  ,  Faith 
U  taken  Relad vcly,when  we  arc  faid  to  be  J  uftified  by  it  j  and 

ic 


(37P) 


icisfaid,tobc  Imputed  to  us  for  Righteot^fncfs  ?  The  Lord 
enlighten  our  dark  underftandings ,  and  give  us  love  to  the 
Truth  and  one  another. 


HAving  done  with  this,  I  proceed  to  your  Additional  Pa- 
per, whith  I  lately  received  ,  and  for  which  I  am  alfo 
really  ihank^H  to  you.  But  the  Anfwer  needs  not  be  long. 
I .  You  think  the  66.Tkef.  hardly  reconcilable  with  the  words 
cited  out  of  prf^,  19 1,  of  that  of  Baptifm,/?ow.3.2  5  &5.9But 
I  fee  not  the  leaft  appearance  of  a  contradidion  Chi  ift  whom 
jaflifying  Faith  receives,doth  Redeem  us  by  bis  blood,and  not 
chiefly  by  his  Principality  J  and  he  favcsus  asaSaviour  ,  and 
rulcth  us  as  a  Ruler.crc-.  But  that  faith  which  on  our  part  is 
the  condition  of  our  intcreft  in  him  &  his  Benefits,!?  the  Belie- 
ving in,  or  receiving  Chrift  as  Chr  ft ,  or  as  he  is  offered  to  us 
in  ibe  Gofpcl/'as  theAff.  mbiy  in  their  Carechifm  well  exprefs 
it.  Davepiiin,t^  CHlver^el'^  Throgmot  tm^  Mr.  T^rton  cSNew 
England  {Catech.p^g.  J  9.)  and  many  more  fay  as  I  in  this :  but 
I  will  not  weary  you  with  citarions  having  been  fo  tedious  al- 
ready. But  I  am  glad  to  fee!  you  yielding  to  the  Truth,  (for  it 
is  a  weighty  Point)  as  you  feem  in  the  next  words,  where  you 
fay,  that  Chrijis  Death  is  the  file  or  chief  oi?j  ell  of  Faith  as  Ju' 
flifjing.  If  you  vield  once  that  it  and  his  Prieftly  Office  is 
not  the  fole  Objeft,  I  will  never  contend  wich  you  about  their 
Precedency,  ^hkh  U  chief.  I  have  confeffed  to  you,  that  it  is 
a  ifuller  (and  ordinarily  fi'ter)  phrafe  ,  to  fay  ,  vee  arejufiified 
by  faithinh'i  hlood^  then  to  fay,  ^e  arejffHfiedby  fiith  in  hs 
Goverrjrney.t,  becaufe  it  pointeth  out  Relatively  the  caufality 
in  the  ObjcA,  and  not  only  the  conditionality  in  the  AS.  But 
I  think  when  you  refpeft  the  faid  condition  cfpeciaily,  that 
then  it  is  the  fr.teft  fpeech  to  fay  ,  ^e  are  ja^iHgd  by  faith  in 
Chriji. 


2.  yjOav  nex:  are  all  of  other  Subjei^ts.  The  fecond  is,  whe- 

1  ther  Luke  i  2,24    import  not  4  denial  of  Title  in  Chrifi  to 

Judge.   The  anfwer  is  obvious,    i.  He  had  not  jtbat  deri- 

Ccc  2  ved 


(380) 


ved  Title  from  men,  which  was  neccflfary  to  him  thatfliould 
exercifc  the  place  of  a  Magillrace.     2.  Chriil  fpeaks  not  of 
Saver Aigntj  (that  he  had:  )  but  MagiflrAcy  (which  is  diftinft 
from  Soveraignty,  as  being  the  Executioner  of  Lawcs,  which 
SoTcraignry  makes,  and  being  under  the  Law,  when  the  So» 
veraign  <5»^f«/ij  is  above  them.)     3.  His  Interrogation  may 
perhaps  b<!  no  Negation.    4.   But  the  plain  anfwer  which  I 
ftick  toiahis.     Ctinft  had  noc  then  a  Title    or  Right  to  the 
aftual  esercifeof  his  power,  as  to  divide  Inheritances.     The 
General  of  an  Army  to  ranfomaSouldiecthatftiouW  dye  for 
Trcafon,  doth  agree  with  the  King,  that  b€  will  put  himfelf  in 
the  place  of  that  common  fouldicr  for  a  months  time,  and  will 
do  ail  his  duty,  and  will  venture  his  life  in  fome  defperate  fer- 
vicc.  Now  during  this  time  while  he  is  in  the  fouldi^rs  place, 
the  General  hath  not  title  to  the  A^ttAlRult^tiQ,  as  before  he 
bad .-  not  becaufe  be  hath  loft  ie ,  but  becaafe  it  will  not  ftand 
with  the  ftate  and  duty  of  a  fouldier  which  he  hath  volunta- 
rily put  hirafelf  in.    Yet  at  the  fame  time,  his  Lteutcnmt  Ge- 
neral and  other  Officers  that  have  their  Commiffions  all  from 
bim  do  Govern.    So  here  :  will  it  follow  that  becaufe  Chrift 
had  not  Title  by  himfelf  to  exercife  the  place  of  a  Ruler  and 
Judge,  being  then  in  the  ftate  of  a  fervant ,  that  therefore  now 
he  hath  not  the  Sovcraignty  ? 


3.  Vf^Our  third  is  from  A/.  1.14.   1  fuppofcyou  mean  the 
I  thirteenth.     But  little  know  I  how  you  would  thence 
argae  with  any  feeming  ftrength.  Chrift  hath  a  threefold  King- 
dom.  The  firft  f  where  he  moft  fully  Rnleth  )  is  the  Jouh  of 
Believers,  It  foHows  not,  that  a  man  that  is  not  ot  this  King- 
dom, is  not  of  Chrifts  Kingdom  at  all.  The  KitigdomofGod 
is  thus  within  us.     The  fecondis^  Tkt  C^ureh  yiJiifU.     This 
ibe  Apoftle  here  fpeaks  of,  and  of  this  Heathens  are  no  rocm- 
bers„     The  third  is,  The  vbole  vcorld  of  mankindyihom  be  hath 
bought  under  his  Dominion,  and  to  be  at  his  Difpofal  (/?ow. 
A  4.9.  &c')    who  are  delivered  into  his  hands,  and  over- ru- 
kd  by  him,  and  be  is  their  Rightfull  King,and  will  Judge  them 
35  their  King,  and  give  them  the  reward  of  Rebellious  Sub- 


(380 

jeSs  thit  wonld  not  conftnc  to  hi?  adail  Rals,  (Luke  ^9  '^7^ 
C^c.)  and  not  only  ai  Rebels  againft  God  as  Creator.  If  he 
be  not  f heir  King,  the^can^not  be  judged  Rebels  againft  him. 
Yea  the  Law  of  Namre  \^  now  his  Law  ,  by  which  be  in  part 
Ruleth  rfiem  thoagh  rhey  know  him  not,  ('many  know  not  the 
true  God,  who  yet  are  partly  Ruled  by  that  his  Law  ;  )  The 
Jews  crucified  their  King,  though  they  wereln.'idelSjand  knew 
bim  not  to  be  their  King.  To  conclude  this  Subjed,  I  defire 
yon  but  to  confider,  whether  there  beany  inconvenience  ap- 
pearing in  the  acknowledgement  o^  Chrifts  General  Domini* 
on?and  whether  it  be  not  the  plain  2nd  frequent  fpcecb  ofScri- 
pture }  And  on  the  other  fide,  whether  it  may  not  be  of  dan- 
geroos  confequence,  as  injurious  to  Chrifl,  to  deny  fo  great  a 
part  of  his  Dominion  ?  and  excufe  not  Infidels  from  the  guilt 
of  Rebellion  agiinft  the  Redeemer  ?  And  whether  itbencs 
introduced  by  Pious  Divines  meerly  in  heat  of  Difputation  , 
whic'i  ufuilly  carrycth  men  into  extreams  ^  cfpeciaily  leaS 
tbey  fliould  yield  to  univerfal  Redemption  in  any  kind  ?  and 
Icaft  they  (hould  yield  to  the  Magiftrates  power  in  Religvoo. 

4.  Your  laftQtieftion  is  about  Univerfel  Redemption  [  If 
it  bt  djfirmed  that  Chrijl  djtdfor  every  child  of  Adam  conditio- 
fiallff  it  W'ould  he  well  proved  from  Scripture  that  the  procuring 
of  juch  A  conditiortjil  X^aw  o-  ^o-jtnant^  vooi  the  end  or  effeCi  of 
Chrijff  death  :  A*id^hetber  the  fo  interpretingTextt  thatfpe^k^ 
of  kit  dying  for  all^  vrill  net  ferve  for  evafions  to  f  tit  by  the  Ar- 
guments  draWn  from  them  toproze  Ch'th  fatisfARion  And  me" 
rit  prefer  te  the  EleFt>  &C.  ]  Anfwer,  I.  Though  I  do 
not  doubt  much  of  the  point,  yet  I  have  no  mind  to  meddle 
with  the  qaeftion,as  it  concerns  thofe  Pagans  that  never  heard 
of  Chrift.  Not  for  fear  of  any  difadvantage  thence  to  the 
caufe,  but  i.  Becaufe  I  find  God  fpeaks  fpahngly  of  thofe 
to  whom  he  fpeaks  not  :  it  concerns  not  us  fo  much  to  know 
nil  Counfcl  concerning  o:hers.  i.  Bcciafe  it  is  an  ill  way  of 
arguing  to  lay  the  ftrefs  of  all  on  the  moll  obfcure  point ;  (  as 
men  do,  that  ftudy  morehow  to  filence  anadverfary,  then 
to  fee  the  Truth  )  and  to  prove  chfcarum  per  cbfcurias.  ?..  This 
is  a  point  that  I  cannot  give  you  my  thoughts  of  in  a  few 
words ;    there  needs  fo  much  for  Explication ;  and  therefore 

Ccc  3  be- 


C380 


being  but  here  touched,  I  (hall  forbear.  3.  I  doubt  no' but 
10  prove  abundantly  frono  Scripture  with  much  evidencc,what 
1  afT.TC  in  this.  4.  It  was  not  the  only,  nor  the  firft  effeft  of 
hii  D;aLh,  that  Chrift  was  [  Satisfa^.ion  to  Godi  Jajf  c^  for  ihi 
Violuion  of  the  Li^,  j  5.  That  fuch  a  conditional  Lawoc 
Covenant  is  g'-an:ed  ,  and  exftant  in  Scripture,  is  as  pUin  as 
moft  poiais  in  the  Gofpel :  and  fure  no  Cuch  thing  can  be  but 
upon  Chrifts  death  as  the  meritorious  eaufc.  6.  So  interpret- 
ing thcfe  Texts  which  are  fo  to  be  interpreted,  is  noevafion  : 
And  no  Text  will  prove  Chrifts  fatisfadion  and  Merit  wholly 
proper  to  the  Eled.  Much  lefs  thofe  which  fay.  He  dulfor 
all  men^  That  God  intcndeth  only  the  Eled  to  be  certainly 
faved  by  Chrifts  death,  I  can  eafily  prove  from  many  other 
Texts  :  But  if  I  (hould  prove  it  by  thefe,  it  were  ftrange. 
It  is  an  ill  confequence  Q  CA^-i/?  ^/>^ /cr  oilmen  ^  therefore 
his  ftttijfa^ian  16  proper  to  the  EleB.  J  7.  In  point  of  Law  the 
Eled  have  no  more  Title  to  Chrift  and  his  Benefits,  then  any 
others  (  as  Eled  before  they  believe.  )  But  Gods  Decree  hath 
from  Eternity  appropriated  Salvation  by  Chrift  only  to  the 
Eled  in  point  of  Event.  He  that  determined  de  eventu^  that 
only  the  Eled  (hould  be  faved  by  Chrift ,  did  yet  :hinkit  the 
fitteft  way  to  his  glorious  ends  to  make  Chrifts  Death  ^fuffici' 
ent  fatisf^Uionfor  all^Sc  to  make  in  his  new  Law  a  ft  ce  deed  of 
Gift  of  Chrift,  and  alibis  Benefits  to  all  that  will  receive  him 
as  he  is  offered ;  yet  not  engiging  himfelf  to  publilh  this  Law 
to  every  particular  man  ^  though  it  be  of  univerfal  extent  in 
the  Tenor.  The  Prornifc  names  none  as  included;  nor  ex- 
cludeth  any.but  who  do  wilfully  exclude  themfclves.  But  thefe 
things  require  fuller  opening. 

S.Laftly,  [Chrifl  d)i^g  /o:ofiof}ro'^gsyo\2  {ay,  is  a  term 
that  needs  as  great  caution  for  the  true  undcrftanding  ic ,  as 
moft  that  we  mi»kcufeof.The  riohtunderftandingofit,isthe 
main  Ground  of  our  fafety  and  comfort  .•  The  wrong  under. 
ftanding  it,  is  the  vety  turning  point  to  Antinoraianifm,  and 
the  very  Primam  vivent  &  u'.t'tmHm  moriens,  the  Heart  of 
the  whole  Syftem  of  their  Doitrinc.  That  Chrift  in  th*;  per- 
fon  of  Mediator ,  did  fuffer  upon  his  voluntary  undertakinc; 
what  wc  (hould  haveelfe  fuffercd,and  thereby  made  fatisfadi- 

on 


C383) 


on  to  Gods  Juftice  for  the  breach  of  his  Law,  both  Father 
and  Son  C  whofe  Willis  one^  agreeing  or  refo.'ving,  that  yet 
ro  man  ftiould  have  adual  Remiffion  or  Salvarion  hereby ,buc 
on  condition  of  receiving  the  Redeemer  fort  heic  Lot  d  and 
Saviour  ;  and  thus  ChrKtdied  loco  omy.ium'.  this  is  found 
Doctrine.  That  at  the  fame  time  it  was  the  fe crct  Will  or 
Eternal  Decree  of  the  Father  •  ard  the  Will  of  the  Mediator 
dt  eventu,  to  give  effedualiy  Grace  to  believe  to  his  Chofen 
only-,  and  confrquently  that  tbey  only  fliculd  be  afually 
faved,  and  thus  he  died  oiAyloco  EltUcrum  is  alfo  found  Doc- 
trine. But  that  (  hrift  in  dying  did  ftridly  reprefcnt  the  per- 
fon  of  the  finner,  fo  as  either  naturally,  or  morally  in  Law- 
fenfe  we  may  be  faid  to  have  fatisfi«:d  then,  in  or  by  him,as  the 
Law  calls  that  the  aSionof  the  Principal,  which  is  done /"fr 
'Dclegatum^  Dtpatatftm  ^Vicarium  (frc.  this  is  the  foul  of 
Antinomianfm;  and  ciredly  and  ueavoidably  infroducerh 
Juftifica".  before  Faith, or  before  we  are  born-,the  nonneceflj- 
ty  of  any  other  Juftification,but  irtforoconfcitntiaM  certainly 
overthiowrth  all  pardon  of  fin  at  all ,  and  fo  all  Petition  for 
Pardon, and  all  tlanksgivingforic,with  thereftof  their  errors: 
yea  makes  man  his  own  Redeemer*  But  I  have  been  too  long 
already.  1  fenfibly  acknowledge  the  truth  of  what  you  fay 
That  this  is  a  matter  of  great  moment,  and  needi-  great  confi- 
dcration.  I  have  bcflowed  more  confideration  about  it,  then 
about  any  other  point  in  Divinity. 

YOUR  UKJe'gned  Friend  And  Brother  (  vrho  dottht 

not  ere  long  to  meet  you  in  our  Center  and  Reft^ 

rebe^e  ull  our  Difference  in  Judgement 

and  K^  ffection  will  be  healed.) 

Richard  Baxter. 

Kederminfter,  June  9. 
1651. 


Sir,  T^he  multitude  of  my  EnploymenU 
caufed  me  to  delay  the  returning  you 
7ny  thoughts  of  your  favourable  Ani^ 
madyer/ionSytil  I  received  your  Addi^ 
tional paper ,  ivhich  made  me  fo  very 
fenfthle  of  your  I^indnefs^  that  I  could 
not  but  [hatch  the  next  opportunity^ 
thus  truly  to' give  you  my  further 
T^houghtSy  as  an  account  of  the  accept 
tance  andfuccejs  of  your  ^Tatns. 


fme  ao. 

Sir, 
'Y  Efterday  I  received  your  third  Paper  dated  fu»e  17.'  to 
\  which  I  thought  beft  to  give  you  this  (Viort  Anfwer  tqgc- 
ther,  feeing  the  former  were  not  gone  out  of  my  hands. 

You  here  touch  (  very  eafily  }  on  two  Subjcft?.  I  will  begin 
with  the  later,  vU.  Your  four  Arguments  againft  my  Doc- 
trine of  Juftification  by  the  Gofpel  Grant  or  New  Law. Your 
firft  is ,  thai  Thii  u  per  refultatttiam  ;  but  fajlification  U  an  aB 
of  Wdl  I  htit  no  AEl  of  Will  ii  bj  neceffary  Refultancy  ] 
Anfwer.  As  it  proccedeth  from  the  Inftrument  or  Foundati- 
on, it  is  by  Refult.incy  :  As  by  that  Inftrument  it  is  the  Ad  of 
the  Legi(lator  ot  T'rincifal  Agent ,  fo  it  is  an  Ad  of  Will.    U 


08O 


was  hi*  W»l^  at  the  cnading  of  the  C'ratjf,  and  ftill  is  his  «^;//, 
that  this  his  (]ranty  or  Deed  of  f?f/>{liould  moraUter  a^ere  & 
tffeciuf  hot  vel illos prodticere ,  at  fuch  a  diftance  upon  fuch  and 
fuch  conditions.     The  Aft  and  Effect  ot  the  Law,    or  Tetta- 
menr,  is  the  Act  and  Effcft  of  the  Legiflator  and  Teliator, 
whofe  Inftrumentit is:  But  thefaidl.^w  orTeftament  do:h 
not  egicacittr  a£tre,  or  produce  thefccffcccs,  till  the  time  that 
the  conditions  are  performed:  ('for  it  is  the  Nature  of  a  Morai 
condition  to  be  added  for  the  fufpenfion  of  the  Effect  or  event 
of  the  Grant,  f^c  till  it  be  perfornjed.  )   Therefore  the 
Rector,  Donor  or  Teftator  doth  notrficaciter  ageretiW  then. 
And  therefore  he  acteth  by  that  his  Inftrument  then,  or  not 
at  ail.    If  you  give  by  Deed  or  by  Will,  fuch  and  fuch  porti- 
ons to  forae  Children  at  fuch  a  term  of  Age,  and  toothers 
when  they  marry  •,  The  full  actual  Right  is  by  a  meer  Reful- 
tancy,  as  from  the  ^n/irumtnt.   but  by  tn  Act  of  f^»7/,  as 
from  you;  but  really  from  neither  before  the  Term, or  conditi- 
on performed.This  is  a  moft  obvious  Truth. 

2.    And  as  eafie  is  the  Anfwcrto  yourfecond.  [  //  the 
Covenant  jujiifie   without     Any  other   jlEi   ,  then  it  ttdoftr, 
fanffifieth^Q lorifieth,  withcMt  anj other.    ]     Anfwer.  In  the 
Propofitions  againft  Mr.  B  eel  ford,   yoaroight  have  feen  this 
difpelled.     For  v^</fl^riV«,  I  yield  the  whole.    But  know  you 
not  that  as  there  is  great  difference  between  changes  Relative 
and  Qualitative  ^  Co  the  later  refults  not  from  a  meer  FunJd- 
mentHm,  &c,    but  is  effected  by  a  Phyfical  Operation?  It  is 
Jm  dd  rem,  it  is  Kght  or  1)Hnefs^  which  is  the  proper  imme- 
diate product}  or  '  (jMaji)  effect  refulting  from,  and  given  by 
the  ^-aw,    or  the  like  luftrument;  and  not  the  natural  thing 
it  felf.    Now  in  thefe  Relaiions,either  the  Right  and  the  thing 
it  feiftLTC  the  fame;  or  elfe  the  difference  fo  fmall,  chat  ic is 
next  to  undifcernable,  and  muft  needs  both  i»  ee.-'em  tnftanti 
refulr,  asjifore  faid.  But  in  Phyfical  changes,thete  is  a  greater 
difference  between  the  Right  and  the  Benefit :  The  'Bene^ 
cafinot,  as  t\\t  Right  doth,  proceed  p^r  nttdamrefultA^titm.li 
you  g  ve  your  Son  ico.  1.  by  a  Deed  of  Gift,  this  giveih 
him  the  Right  immediately,  butnot  the  Thing.    Tberemuft 
be  a  Phyfical  Act  to  that.     But  Pardon  to  a  Malefaftoris 

D  d  d  given 


085) 


given  by  a  written  7'«^^•<^*«  or  (^mnt^  from  whence  the  Right 
to  K,  and  the  Benefic  it  felf,  do  immediately  rcfultC  being 
indeed  butonethmg,  except  my  underftandingbe  too  grofs 
to  diltinguifh  ihem.  )  If  therefore  you  had  faid  as  you  (hould, 
that  flight  to  Glory,  and  to  Sanctity  (  fo  far  as  that  Cove- 
nant givfcth  ic  )  are  beftowed  without  any  o:her  Act,  (  except 
hnali  Judgement. which  is  neccffary  to  full  J ullif  cation  as  well 
as  Uloryjl  Qiould  yield  you  a!!. 

3 .  Vo  ^  our  third,  [_  That  the  Covenant  jufl'i fie:  but  conditi- 
onally, therefore  r.otmEii*ully.  1  1  anfvvered  before  :  for  ic  was 
one  of  your  former  Arguments.  Conditio  eft  Lex  addita  ne- 
gotio  qu*  donee  fr^fleiur  everttum  fuffendit  ,  faith  Cujaciw. 
And  as  MjnffKger  faith,  Netf-^  aftte^  neej^  chligatio  ttlla  eft  an- 
tequam  condiiia  eveniat  \  £jaia<juod  eft  tn  conditioner  nontft  in 
obligatiene '.  (  SchoLinfnftit.^,'^11.  )  So  that  it  is  the  Na- 
ture of  the  condition  to  fufpend  the  effect,  but  not  to  make 
the  caufetobeno  caufe.  Indeed  if  the  Condition  be  never 
performed,  then  it  deftroyesor  prevents  the  effect,  and  fo  the 
Inftrument  doth  not  agere  :  And  why  ?  but  becaufe  it  was  the 
Will  of  the  Agent  that  It  (hould  act  fo,  and  on  fuch  termf,or 
elfe  not:  fo  that  the  non-performance  doth  not  nndo  what  the 
Inftrument  did,nor^pth  it  difoblige  the  Author  ,  but  it  mani- 
fedeth  that  he  was  never  obliged:  fihey  arc  Grotiuswords.  j  I 
conclude  therefore  that  when  the  condition  is  performed,  then 
the  Inftrument  or  conditional  Grant  doth  begin  vere  Agere  & 
donare  ;  and  the  Agent  by  it:  but  till  then  it  doth  not  pro- 
perly aet  or  effect  at  all. Is  not  your  Teftamentthat  gives  your 
Legacy ,  becaufe  it  gives  conditionally  ?  Or  muft  there  be 
fome  other  Act, to  make  it  an  abfolute  proper  Gift, 

4.  Your  fourth  alfo  is  one  of  thofe  which  you  have  in  the 
Beginning, where  I  have anfwercJ  it.  The Covenayft  yoxihy ^ 
ii  an  AEl  pafi  ;  and  fo  not  continued^  andfo  the  Jufltficaiion  hj  it 
paft^andnet  comiiued,  &c.  3  Anfwer.  The  Phyficai  Act  of 
Lcg;flationor  Covenant  granting  is  part  but  this  only  makes 
it  an  Inftrument^  able  and  fit  to  produce  fuch  and  fuch  effect?, 
and  not  actually  to  produce  them  at  that  prefenr,  when  iris 
conditional.  Bnc  the  Moral  action  of  this  Law  or  Covenant 
n  not  paft,  but  continued.      The  Law  or  Covenant  is  not 

oat 


(iSy) 


one  of  Date.  And  ttere fore  It  contiuueth  flill  to  /uft.fie.  '^h-- 
making  of  our  Laws,  a^e  Acts  part  by  Parliaments  long  ?go, 
and  (o  not  continued.  Will  you  therefore  conc'ude  th.uthe 
Moral  Agency  or  Efficiercy  of  ihefc  faws  is  palt,  and  there- 
fore chcy  do  not  condemn  or  juftifie  ?  I  kn'iw  no  grcuud  chat 
can  bear  your  conclulions,  except  with  RifoyMortk  (  Dlahg  ) 
and  fuch  other  of  the  more  impudent  Papifts,  one  fhc'uld  vih- 
fie  the  Scripture,  and  fay,  that  they  were  only  v-ircdhncocs 
occafional  writings ,  and  never  intended  to  be*C7<"!'j  ^"S'^^S  or 
our  Rule  ef  Faith  and  Life  ;  but  I  believe  you  will  never  come 
to  that.  Surely  D^v/t^  frequently  Hileih  the  old  Scrip-ures 
that  were  in  his  Tm^sGodsLa^:  And  why  many  Div  nes 
fliould  ftrike  in  with  fome  Luther^nr  Error  in  denying  the 
Gofpel  or  New  Scripture  to  be  properly  f  Ckrifis  Z^w,  ]  and 
fo  inveigh  againftthofe  that  call  it  the  Nerv  La-w^  I  know  no 
Rcafon  ;  but  that  the  ignu  fatuus  of  contention  and  preju- 
dice mifleadeth  them.  Chappy  Difputers  that  are  rot  car- 
ried head- long  into  extreams  by  the  fpirit  of  Contradidion  I 
What  more  proper  to  the  reformed  Religion,  as  fuch,then  to 
honour  the  Scriptures?  And  how  do  thefe  men  vilific  them, 
and  rob  them  of  their  higheft  honor,  that  deny  them  to  be 
the  Laws  of  God  ?  yea  deny  this  to  the  Gofpel  it  felf  ?  Is  not 
Ch;ift  the  Law-giver  ?  I(a,  n.'iz.Pjal.to.j.  and|  108.8. 
and  the  King?  Muft  not  the  Law  go  out  of  Zw»,  Ifa.i.s. 
And  is  not  that  the  Law  and  Teftimony  to  which  we  muft 
feek  ?  Multitudes  of  Scrip'Mre?,  and  mrft  of  the  Father<^thac 
ever  1  readjdocall  the  Gofpel  Chrifts  Law"  or  the  [[new  law.] 

2.T0 your  fccond  Exception,  ?gainft  my  approving  a  fpeech 
of  Dr.ff.]Ianf.i  Do  I  need  to  fell  you  how  unike  this  faying 

ofDr.  Wcrfl'/ is  to  that  ofihe  Council  cf  7>rx^  ?  Ycukncw 
by  5'/i*^i^<:4/><7w  they  mean  principally  Sandification?  ''ut  the 
Dr.  faith  not  that  thefe  are  preparatives  to  Juftifica  ion.  Sure 
you  cou'd  not  fcrioLfly  fufpect  me  to  joi.n  with  the  Papifts 
when  thev  fpeak  of  one  Subje  A,  and  I  of  another.  The  ads 
of  that  Seffion  will  tel  you  more  diff.rerces  between  them  and 
me,  then  is  worth  the  while  to  repeat:  and  you  know  bow 
largely  C/^f»w>w<>/>/;<  endeavours  to  prove  that  by  Dfpofjn'cKS 
4ind  PrepnAtms,    The  CouriCiU  mean  U^^mj  •    and  th:^c 

Ddd  -  thev 


(388) 

ihey  would  fubdoloufly  introduce  the  Thing,  {Merita  Ji com* 
gruo  )  by  changing  the  name ;    as  out  of  OftM  words  and 
others  he  gathers. 2. And  know  you  not  that  ChemKuitu  pro- 
fedeth  to  yield  to  the  foundnefj  of  thit  very  fixeh  Chapter, 
whichyou  alledge,  were  it  not  for  thefe  guiles  thattheyufe, 
and  their  evil  fenieto  advance  Merit  ?     For  faith  he,    Om>nno 
certus  eji'  five  *nodiu  five  or  do  in  vtrbo  Dei  nobid  defignatpu  e^ 
pralcripttir,  (jpto  Dens  utltftr  cjUAndo  vult  hominem  ad  Jufiifica- 
tiommdedHCtre^    &c.  Et  (jma^modum  ftve  ordi^^em  iflumdi' 
vin  tfis  pr.f^criptum,    nonvoluyt  ft  ditctu  fplritus  accontmodare, 
fedntgltgunt  &  concttlcant  ilium , hi  dd  ff*fiificatio»tm  non  fro- 
veaiunt.     Fftlt  enm  Oeut  k  T^titra  &  t^^enfu  verbi  ftti  ms 
erdiri :   &  •^nte  f  i^ifiationem  optrtet  pr^cedere  contritionim^ 
hoe  efti  [eritm  Agmtronem  peceatornm^  pavores  confcientix  ag- 
nofcentis  iram  Dei  adverfns  mjira  peccata  ,  (^  dolertiii  propttr 
ptccatum  '•  irKjuactntritronenonretinetur^fedabpcitHrpr^pO' 
fitum  perfeverandi  (fr  ptrgtndi  infceltrihus.     ^Ad  hot  vero  ter- 
rorti  necejfe  efi  accederefidem,  tjHt  agnitione  ^  flducin  miferi' 
cordid  Deipromi^t  propter  filinm  rued  atortm^  rurfus  erigat  & 
confoletur  animum-i  ne  efpre^ffi  differ AfionerHamtis  in  ^tttrnum 
txltium.      Std  fides  accedat  ad  Dtum^  t^uarat^  defideret^petat, 
npprdhtndat  (^  accipiat  Remijjionem  peccatorurn.     Et  hoc  modo 
feu  crdine  in  vtrbo  Dei  defignatt  'viam  pxrari  DominOiPtfin  ipfo, 
per  (^prdpt trip ffim  fide confet^uamur  <^  accipiamut  Jufiifica-' 
ticnemt  ipfa  fcrifttira  tradit,  &c.  this  alfo  he  thews  Lnthtr  ap- 
proved of. 

Now  I  pray  you  teli  me  whether  hpre  be  not  full  as  much  as 
Dt«  Waxd  or  I  fay  ?  And  do  you  think  Chtmnitistj  did  join 
with  the  Papifts  of  Trent ^  u.'hcn  be  confuted  them  ? 

I.  And  if  Dr. f^.  hadfpoak  of  Sandification,  arethefc 
not  multitudes  of  our  own  beft  approved  Divines,  that  make 
all  thefe  ads  to  be  found  in  men  by  way  of  preparation  before 
Stnftification  ?  Mr.  Rogers  of  Dedham  in  his  Treat,  of  faith; 
Mr.  Hcokfr  in  his  Epift.  before  that  book,  and  oft  in  his  own 
book,  affirmeth  not  only  a  common  preparatory  contrition, 
Hungring  and  thirfting,  Hope.LoveJoy,  but  even  effedual 
fpecial  Vocation  it  felf,and  fo  faith  to  go  before  Sandification 
md  JuiliBcation.    And  indeed  what  man  denyecb  it?  except 

Mr. 


C389) 


Mr.  Ptmhlt  and  a  very  few  that  with  hhn  make  Sandification 
and  Vocation  to  be  all  one  ?  which  how  far  I  approve  my 
fcif,  I  have  (hewed  m  Treat,  of  Reft,  Part.  i.  Chap.  8.  fccr. 
2.  g.4. 

4.  But  look  into  the  words,  and  find  out  what  error  you 
can  I  Which  of  thofc  acc«  do  you  tlink  goes  not  before  Julti- 
ficacion  ?  And  if  they  go  before,  fure  you  will  not  denv  but 
they  do  forae  way  or  other  difpofe  or  fit  a  man  for  pardon  •• 
orelfe  God  would  not  have  prefcribed  them  before  it.  i.  Ca- 
tholjck  faith  is  the  Belief  oftheCatholickDoftnne.  I  am  fure 
you  take  that  to  go  before  Juftification.    2.  I  f  Hope  of  par- 
don go  not  before,  then  Affiance  fto  whxh  Hope  iseffeittial  ) 
goes  not  before  ;  Yea,  then  Believers  do  dcfpair  iu  the  Aft  of 
iielieving  to  juftification,    3.   I  never  knew  the  man  that 
doubted  whether  fearof  Punifliroent  went  before.    4.  The 
fame  I  may  fay  of  grief  for  fin.    jf.  And  if  all  the  doubt  be 
•  ofTurpo/e  agmnfifin,  a»d  for  Amcndmtnt^     I .  Sure  they  that 
fay  Repentance  is  pre-rcquifite  to  juftification,  will  not  exclude 
^  Pu*poje  of  Amcndmtrt.     2.  And  fure  thofe  that  faySancti- 
ficaiion  and  Vocation  are  ail  one,  and  go  before  Juftification 
will  hardly  exclude  ic.    3 .  They  that  take  a  turning  fom  Ido!§ 
to  the  true  God,  as  the  end,  robe  in  order  before  a  Turning 
from  Infidelity  to  the  Mediator  as  the  way  ,  which  is  by  Faith  • 
thcfc  muft  needs  think  that  fo  much  of  A^u^l  Amendment 
goes  before  Juftifica  ion  (je  believe  tn  God,  believe  alfo  in  mt.) 
4.  They  that  fay,  Fjnth  alone  jufl'jitth^  but  not  the  faith  ^hich 
it  alene^  will  furely  include  this  Ptirpofe  as  Antecedent.    Dave- 
»<»Hf,Mr.!34//.&c,;exprefsit,andinfiftonir.   Dr.  Twifs  cal- 
leth  works  OMedia  ^icaufadifpofuiva  :  But  it  were  cndlefs  to^ 
cite  Authors  in  this  Point.     5.  ButT  tell  you  my  mind.   1  take 
this  Purpofe  of  obeying  Chrift  de  futuro  to  be  very  Faith  it 
*felf    For  faith  is  a  Covenant- reception  of  Chrift,  and  to  take 
him  for  Chrift  and  King-  Redeemer,  and  to  Pur p  fe,yca  Cove- 
nant to  obey  him,  are  but  one  thing.    And  therefore  a  Giving 
up  our  felves  as  Redeemed* fubjects,  and  fo  a  purpofe  of  b'  ing 
actually  fubject,  are  faith  it  feif.     And  then  they  muft  needs  be 
prerequifite  to  Juftification.     So  that  whethr  you  take  thefc 
Acts  for  common  or  fpecial,  fuely  they  go  before  J  uftification  • 

Ddd  3  as 


*sDr.  fVard  hkh.  Dare  you  tell  any  man  of  yout  Hearers 
that  though  he  have  not  (o  much  as  a  Purpofe  to  mend,  yec  he 
is  juitihed  by  Faith  ?  Truly  I'uch  paffages  bauc  emhitcercd  the 
minds  of  Papifts,  and  many  weak  ones  againft  our  Doctrine  of 
JuUification  .-  and  given  great  advantage  to  the  ^ntino- 
mijis. 

Forwhatyou  fay  of  contrsdiding  Dr.  DoVcttame  and  Mr. 
I^emhlci  lanfwer,  i.  Though  they  dff  r  between  them- 
felvcs  in  the  point  of  j  unification,  and  one  hath  wrote  a  con- 
futation of  the  others  Dodrinc,  yet  you  will  never  lliew  rac 
wherein  this  fpeech  of  Dr.  fVard  doth  con;radid  citjiet  of 
them.  Indeed  if  Dr.  i^ard  had  determined  whether  he  meant 
common  Difpofitionsor  fpecial,  perhaps  he  migh:  have  con- 
tradidedoncof  them.they  dofo  far  differ  themfelvcs.  For 
you  know  Mr.  T<'»^^/*  not  only  in  his  Vindic.  (7r.it.  but  even 
in  the  place  you  cite  (!:4^,42.43.)  takes  thofe  Ads  to  be  of 
fpecial  Grace, or  a  part  of  Sanflification,  which  moft  Divines 
do  judge  to  be  preparatory  thereto.  And  for  my  part,  I  judge 
at  Mr. /'^w^/f,;f  you  take  but  that  pointintoquahheit.which 
I  have  aHlrtcd  Treat,  of  Reft,  fecond  Edit,  fart  3.  cap.il.thAZ 
the  finccrity  of  G  ace  as  faving,  lyeth  not  inihe  bare  nature 
of  the  Ad,  but  in  the  prevailing  degree  which  Morality  may 
fpecifie.then  [  fay  asMr.  T«'w^/^  pag.45.  that  thefe  Vertues 
which  are  (many  of  them  by  our  Divmes)  reckoned  as  Difpo- 
fitions  to  RegenerBfion,  are  if  they  betrue,the  main  parts  and 
fruits  of  Reg'-^neration. 

2.  But  I  admrehowyourtiould  think  that  fpeech  of  Dr. 
IVArdj  (linuld  be  a  j  >ining  with  the  Papifts  againft  Dr.  Dow- 
name  and  Mr.  TembU,  when  Dctvna'ne  tells  you  that  the  Pa- 
pifts difpuce  of  another  fubjed  then  we  do^  while  they  mean 
one  thing  by  it,  vsl  Sandificationjand  we  another :  (upon 
which  ground  Mr.  i^^otton  is  ready  to  throw  out  the  Difpute, 
as  being  al>out  one  Term,  but  dtfferent  fubjects.  )  And  Mr. 
Pemhle  anfwers  (~/^<«f  the  Jyj^umtnt  o/Bellarmine  from  ehae 
chapter  of  the  CoukcHs  fixth  fejf.  ii  framed  on  the  Error  ^hich 
pfitJ  otitoffyame  the  v>ho/e  Di/ptite^  viz.  that  Regeneration 
a:*!l  SrinUificitfoyjis  a'lono  th'n^w-th  ^ufii^cation^  and  that  to 
JMj(  fie  a  finner  is  nothi»g  eife  but  to  do  aVeaj  inherent  corrup- 
tion 


C39I) 


tionby  infttfion  of  inherent  RighteoHfntfs.  J     And  ^o  Mr.  Fem- 
ale difputcs  againft  it  only  as  thus  meant  :  And  Calvin  alfo 
in  his  Ar.tfdot.  on  this  6,  Sr^.  6.  chap,  never  once  finds  faulc 
with  them  here,  but  only  for  afcribing  that  to  free  Will  which 
they  (hould  afcribe  to  effcAual  Grace  j   and  for  making  Jufti- 
fication  to  be  Sanctification,  but  not  a  word  for  making  thefe 
Acts  to  be  pracparatory  to  Juftification  ,  (  TraElat.  Thtologic, 
fagl^J  388.)  /^^»V.  et^am  iy^rttculo:  facfthat.  Parifienf.  Ayt. 
/^.defeniM  pAj>i(ii'o.    Every  man  that  makes  Faith  tO  contain 
many  ads(moft  Divines  fay  ,  Notitiam,  Ajfer.fpim  &  fdnci- 
am,  Arttcftus  names  five  J  muft  needs  make  all  thofe  Ads  to  be 
prerequifice  to  Juftificnion,  befides  Repentance,and  befides 
preparatory  ads  of  common  Grate.     Neman  that  I  know 
doth  feeni  to  come  nearer  youthen  Dr.  Dorvn.tme  in  placing 
jullifying faith  in  Affcnt,  and  fo  not  taking  it  to  contain  io 
many  ads :  And  yet  even  he  tells  you,  that  [jhe  a[}  of  the  fVi/i 
(iothcc^icur  to  Fai'h  ami  that  fahh  vehich  ij  a  (jjifit  of  the  windy 
is  featedM  vrell  in  the  fViIl  oi  in  the  ZJ nderfl anding  :  and  this  14 
Confe^ed  bi  Fathers ^  Schoolmen ^  and  themcdirn  Dehors  of  the 
IRomipj  Church.']  Treat,  oflttflf.  pag.  358.  359.      Yea  for 
ought  I  can  underftand  he  extended  faith  as  far  as  I, and  meant 
as  I  do  herein,  p*i^.  348349  352»hefaith,    ^^'By  the  former 
vohich  is  a  bare  Affent,  \tf  ^0  afttr  a  fort  Credere  Chriftum,  rfr- 
hnorpledge  him  to  bt  the  Saviour  of  thofe  that  believe  in  him  -'  By 
the  letter,  vrhxh  if  the  lively  and  (Retinal  A^tnt  rvori^JKg  on  the 
Heart .^  Xve  do  credere  in  Chriftum,  and  receive  him  to  be  our  Sa^ 
vioHr^  \}rhere!^pon  necfjfarily  fo/lofveth  Affa^^ce  in  Chrtjl  ^  and 
love  of  him  04  a  Sav  ot^^.     Thus  then  by  a  true  Belief  ^e  receive 
and  Embrace  (fhr'-fh  ,  in  our  judgement  by  a  lively  /iffent :  in 
our  Hearts,  de(iring  earnefilj  to  be  partakers  of  him  (  rrhich  De- 
(ire  rve  exprefs  by  our  Prajtr^ )  and  in  our  tf^illt  rtfolvm^^  ro  ac- 
knowledge and  Profefs  him  to  be  our  only  Saviour  ,   a«V  to  refl 
upon  him  alone  for  Salvation.    So  that  a  true  lively  and  tjftilu- 
al  faith  is  the  \\"}rl^  of  the  rvkole  foul ;   thst  is  to  faj^  oa  XYell  of 
theHrartatoftheMiy.^^K'ym  lO.lO  Ad  16. 14.  Ad. 8. 37."] 
fo  far  Dr.  T)ovename.     Is  not  this  as  much  as  I  fay  ?    and  the 
very  fame  ?  I  only  mention  him  (having  m:\nv  more  at  hand ) 
bccaufc  I.  you  urge  him,  and  2.  Iconjcdure,  youthinkyou 

go 


CJpi) 


go  his  way  about  the  nature  of  Faith.  If  this  be  not  as  much 
as  I  fay  do  but  add  what  he  faitb,^4^.  1 5 .  and  I  think  you  have 
as  much  ;  (in  this  particular.  )  Q  The  true  meamng  (faith  he^ 
of  the  Oue[iion,  [rvhether  vte  are  jHJlifielb}  Faith  or  hy  iVorkj?'^ 
is  not  as  oppofitg  the  inward  Grace  of  Faith  to  the  onf^a^-d  alls 
of  obedience^  ^hlch  indeed  a  e  tht  f^^  hit  1  of  Faith  :  But  at  of' 
fo fl'g  the  Right eofifnefs  of  Chrifi  apprehended  by  Faith  ,  to  the 
righteoujnejs  ^hichk  Imhtrtftt  in  our  jehes^  and  performed  by 
cttr  felves. 

And  truly  Sir,T  ufe  to  charge  my  confcience  to  enquire  what 
'  may  be  the  plain  ineining  of  a  Text,  and  co  embrace  tha^and 
not  againft  Light  to  be  carrycd  by  prejudice  :  and  this  confci- 
ence tells  me  that  this  Rcfolution  of  Dr.  Dotvname  being  fo 
plainly  agreeable  to  Taui^  is  not  to  be  reJeAed.    When  1  im- 
partially con(ider  what  Pan/ dviycih  at,  my  Judgement  tells  me 
that  ic  was  never  his  intent  to  advance  any  one  Hmple  A^  of 
the  foul  into  the  office  of  juftifying,excluding  all  the  reft  ;  but 
to  advance  Chiift  againft  mens  own  works  which  ftood  up  then 
in  competition  with  him :  And  that  Paul  never  meant  that  Af- 
fent  Juftifics,  but  not  yeffet/icceptare,Cofifentire,  Eligere^Fidu' 
ciam  habere^  &fc. 

Suppofe  chere  be  a  mortal  Difeafe  that  hath  feized  on  a  Ci- 
ty, which  no  ma  n  can  cure  but  one  only  Phydtian :  nor  he  but 
by  a  Medicine  that  will  coft  him  as^uch  as  the  lives  of  the  Ci- 
tizens are  worth  :  This  Phyfitian  comes  and  fends  to  them,and 
offers  them  all  without  exception ,  that  if  they  will  but  take 
him  for  their  Phyfitian  and  truft  him  with  their  lives ,  he  will 
not  only  man  feft  his  skill,  that  he  is  able  to  cure  them,  but  he 
will  do  ic,  and  pay  for  the  Phyfick,  and  not  put  them  to  pay  a 
penny.     Hereupon  Tome  th  it  are  his  enemies,  and  fome  that 
are  miftakenin  the  man  oponfalfe  reports,   and  fome  that 
judge  of  h«m  by'  his  ou;ward  appearance,do  all  concludejfthis 
is  fome  Deceiver,  he  is  not  able  to  do  any  fuch  matter ;  none 
but  fools  will  truft  hiro,and  venture  their  lives  in  his  hand  ;  let 
a^  ftir  about  and  labour  and  we  (hall  overcome  it,  and  do  well 
enough.]  Ontbecontrary  the  Phyfitian,  having  great  com- 
paiiion  on  he  poor  deluded  people,  knowing  their  cafe  better 
(hen  (b&mf<£ivcs,  and  having  already  bought  the  remedy  for 

them 


Cm) 


tbem,  doth  fend  to  them  again,  to  cell  thero  alf,that  thofcthat 
will  believe  him  and  rrofi  him,  he  WiUcerrarnly  cure  ,  and  the 
reft  fliall  dye  every  man  of  them,  for  all  they  think  to  labour  ic 
away.    I  pray  you  now  put  our  Queftions  here  impartially  : 
I .  Is  believing  and  trufting  the  Phyfitian  fome  one  fingle  a6^, 
excluding  all  others  ?  Or  was  it  ever  his  intent  to  advance  fome 
one  aft  of  theirs?     2.   Would  it  not  be  a  learned  madncfs  to 
dilute  whether  the  Phyfitian  make  the  aA  of  Affent.or  the  a  A 
of  Willing  only  :  ©r  Accepting,  ^t.  or  Affiance,  or  Recum- 
bency to  be  the  Healing  aft ;  and  of  what  faculty  th«t  ad  was 
which  muft  heal  them  ?    3.  Isic  the  Trufting  and  Receiving 
him  only  i .  as  one  that  hath  brought  a  Remedy  :  2. Or  as  one 
that  cao  and  will  cure  us  by  it:    or  g.  Alfoasone  that  muft 
be  obeyed  in  the  ufe  of  that  remedy  for  the  effeding  the  cure ; 
which  of  thefe  is  it  that  he  intends  muft  be  the  Objcd  of  their 
Act?    4.  Doth  QTrufting  him  and  Believing  him    exclude  a 
Kefolution  to  obey  his  Diredions  and  the  future  actual  obe- 
dience? Surely  no;  it  includetb  both  :  But  it  excludeth  both 
their  trufting  any  other  Phyfitian,  and  their  thinking  to  work 
away  the  Difeafe  and  cure  themltlvcs.     5.  Doth  Trufting  or 
Believing  him  cure  thefe  men  as  the  Inftrument  ?  or  is  it  only 
a  condition  without  which  he  will  not  cure  them?  But  thif 
QueftioB  with  you  I  may  fpare. 

Uftly,  You  qutiion,  {Ho^lwiBsvoU  Tompfons  fffimtn 

eftbe  httnifioncf  Juftifcalicn  Ufontheecmmitting  a  fm  that 

^4fiitheccnfci$nci^  ffleftJmak^  JujiififaUtn  4  contintttd  A^ 

HtincoMditionofoh^i^crf'^   jiftfW,    j.  Doyou  notdifccrtl 

tliat  the  QueftioD  coiivernetb  you  and  every  man,  as  much  as 

mc?  and  that  it  i^  of  a^ijodl  di^cutiy  upon  your  own  an4 

others  opinion,  81  upon  mirie  ?  Pr  VownMmtwiW  tell  you  as 

well  as  I,  that  Juftificatioh  if  a  contioaed  Act.    So  will  Dr. 

Tmfj,  and  all  tha^  with  him  do  take  it  for  an  Immanent  Act. 

Your  felf,  who  take  it  for  a  tranHem  act  but  once  performed, 

do  yet  Judge  (^  doubt  not  J  that  our  Juftified  eftate  which  w 

thetffccsof  i^J?  permanent :  and  A«rflaUon$  of  Reconciled, 

Pardoned,  Adoptcd.art  (ontinoed .  Alfo  you  and  they,I  hopc^ 

will  confefs;  chat  Juftificadon  piflivc  li  cpntinetd  on  the  cott- 

dirion  of  continocd  fijih.   Now  |  weold  ktiow  how  ycu  will 

E  c  c  ;       svoiii 


dff(?i^  of  a  C(irj|>jaqj  Uiip  r\mea  unbelief  gives  him  ,a  ,forf, 
whkb  istoocojumoA?  as  you  anfw.er^fo  (^/illl!  Ifyb^uftynis 
faith  tf  not  overcome  lubicvi ally,  when  unbelief  is  prevalent  in 
the  prefent  A^  ,  I  will  Tiy  fo  of  his  obeJience.     2. ,  You 
know  raoft  Divines  fay  i^  ramcji  ^s^^thac  obedience  tti condi- 
tion of  the  con;inu^ticQof  Ja^iicacion,  (o^^V  ^^cy  fty  th^ 
faith. only  it  t[)ft.Inftr;iaieci  oif^J^ftii'yin^,  )  and  how  will 
ibcy  anfweryou?     ?.  Youki\p;wtl^a  tall  fay,  that  obedience 
Hg  condifion  o£  Salvation,  and  fp of  oqr  prefent  Title  toSal- 
vation.  N^w  how  will  they  avoiii  Tompfom  Doctrine  of  Inter- 
cifiooof  that  Title,  to  Sal^wioa,   upon  the  committing  of 
fDcb  fins  ?    4.  It  i^  m>Cp,Qrfcd  ol^edience  which  I  fty  is  the 
conditiofi^but  tincere  .V  Aq4by  ^nccre  \  mean  fo  mucq  as  mvf 
cxprefsthat  weunfeignedly  tatuChrift  ftill  for  bur  Lord  ana 
Saviour:   And  fo  it  is  not  ev?ry  fin  that  I  fay  will  forfeit  or 
interrupt  our  Juftifjcation  and  qmfeitto  difcontinuc,(that  is, 
lofe  our  Title,    oj;  change  ourKelationinLaw:  )   hobot 
every  gfofs  fin  :  bac  only  that  fin  which  is  ihconfiU'eht  with 
lheconcin«ed  Accepting  Chriljt  for  our' Soveraign  :   that'fih 
which  brcjks  the  main  C.overi^ni,  ("of  wl)'ch  fee  Dr.  fttfiomi 
large,)  as  Adultery  or  Dclerticwi  doth  in  naarrJage :  A  deny- 
ing God  to  be  our  ^^^^  or  Chrift  t<^  be  Qfjr  Chrift,   by  our 
woirks,  while  we  confefs  him  in  word  :   An  adualexpliciteor 
implicite  Renunciation  of  Chri0,  and  tai^tn^chefleni  foronr 
Qiaffrer ,  and  the  pleafingof  it  for  ourhappinefs;    or  astbc 
cPW^iifow^Mw/ following  a  falfe  Chrift.  .'Wow,  I  hope  that  no 
jllftified  perfon  doth  evr  comn»5f,.7ii»»s  fin  ,  mych  lefs  any 
elca  and  juftified  man,  of  whon)  fct^pfct*  fpeaks.You  may  fee 
tferfugh  his  ninth  chap.  pArtz,  that  7'owf/cw  erred  through 
aiifnnderftanding  wherein  the  fincerity  of  Faith  as  juftifying 
doShcQIifift:  (I  wifti  many,  more  do  not  fo.  )    He  thought 
Xhn  Jaftificition  did  follow  every  actof  undi/ftrabled  Faith  j 
bDconlyrootcdFajtb  would;  certainly  perfevere;  and  tbere^- 
^ore  the  unrooted  (Though  true  Believers.)   might  lofe  their 
jl^iHcatioD,,  if  they  were  Reprobates  (  Prdfciti  as  he  calls 
ibcfl)))  or  have  it  i^tcrr^pted,  if  they  were  elect.  But  if  he 
M  kaoWD^what  I  baveajOferted  ifttbe  aforelaid  esf»i  i.part  $. 

of 


% 


(3PT) 


of  Refit  Eitt.2')  that  the  very  fincerity  of  faith  as  juflifying, 
lyeth  not  in  the  natural  being  of  the  act  CQcerly,  but  the  pre- 
valent Degree  and  Hioral  Tpeciiication,  then  he  would  have 
known,chathis  Murootedoviti  were  nev«r  juftified,  &  therefore 
never  loft  it.  Andif  inaffertingjuftification  by  the  only  act 
of  Fiith,  he  had  not  over- looked  the  ufe  of  the  habx.hehad 
not  fpokc  fo  much  of  Incercifionof  Juftification,  through  in- 
terruption of  the  acts,  where  the  Habits  remain.  ( Of  this  I 
rauft  further  eiplainroy  felf,  where  it  is  morefeafonable.)  His 
Objections p^, 2.1. c*^.5.p^^f.  I.  I  have  anfwered  in  the  place 
before  cited.  Yet  even  Tew/j/tfw  deayeth  that  ever  (ins  once 
pardoned  do  return,  orJuJiificauontmAptccaUs  fcmelremiffit 
Mmitti.  ^  pag.ii.part..i.cap.2.)  yi/i  f,irjonaw qna  Mliquandf 
JHJia  fuit,  pefe  contrahert^  &  aliquando  M^lu  centrahert  ftr  nc 
Vi^ftccata^  novMm  rtatnm  irt  Divtn€  (^  mortis  dterne  '  S&tbfC 
it  if  nor  t6e  lofs  of  the  firft  juiiification  thajt  .he  aderteth.  I 
corKJude  then  that  as  you  and  others  apfwer  Tempfon^  juftfo 
wiiU,  Cif  you  do  it  well :  )  for  it  conceroeth  my  caufe  no  more 
then  yours,or  other  m^  ns. 

But  Sir,  you  have  drawn  me  fo  neer  the  difficulty  which  per- 
plexech  me,  that  I  will  now  open  it  to  you.     How  to  avoid  the 
InterciHon  of  juftificatfon,  is  a  queftion  that  bath  longtrou- 
^bled  me :  not  on  any  of  thefc  terms  proper  to  my  own  judge- 
jnem  :  but  how  on  your  Grounds,or  any  Orthodoi  Divines 
it  will  be  avoided.    I  would  know   i.  whether  we  are  GuHty 
.  (not  only/4£?»,  ftdfana)  of  every  fin  we  commit?  or  of  fucb 
fins  as  Dav«Vj,  before  Repentance  ?  if  not  guilty  :  then  what 
need  of  Pardon,  of  daily  praying  Forgive  us  our  Debts,  or  of 
a  Cbrift  to  procure  our  Pardon  ?  If  we  are  Guilty  ,  how  can 
that  confift  with  a  juAified  ftate  }  Reams  efi  obllgatie di  ?#• 
;  nam.    The  leaft  fin  unpardoned.makes  obnoxious  to  condem- 
nation and  Hell :  He  that  is  obnoxious  to  then;i,  is  not  at  pre- 
fent  juftified.     Here  I  am  much  puzled,  and  in  the  dark.    In 
«my  y^pW.  I  have  flightly  touched  it ,  but  foas  doth  not  ^WMr 
tart  iAt.eUeQ,H0>»  |  deny  the  Inrercifion  of  univerfal  Juftificatr- 
on.     Yet  I  dare  not  fay  but  that  a  Believers  fins  may  be  un- 
pardoned till  he  Repent,  Believe  and  fcek  pardpn.  And  I  d&rf 
not  thinki  that  Cbrift  tcach^tb  ns  to  pray  only  for  pardon  1f» 

Eee  a  " -^      '     fcr» 


/or#  c6nffitHtU^  or  only  of  the  tempowl  puniihment,  nor  only 
forcontinuanceof  what  wehad  before.     Buc  how  to  make 
pcrfonal  un  verfal  uninterruprcd  Juftification  confift  with  the 
Guilt  of  one  fin,  or  with  one  fin  unpardoned,  here  is  the  knot. 
Our  tiritifli  Divines  in  Dohfjm^.Atl.'ie  Per  fever.  Thf.^.paj^: 
166.   fay,  that  believers  hjfMchfinsRtAtum  moriir  inCHrrHnt. 
PrUeaux  LeCl.6  de  pfr/iv.'pj^.Sofaich,  they  to  riatum  <idM- 
nabilem  contrsbtre  ,  ftc  ut  faltim  demtvitone  ,  licet  Aon  ef t^i- 
ve.ffii  Adregnptm  ctlorum  ftnitm amlttSHt  :'■  fThis  dtftinctlon 
doth  no  good  :  ioT  wo  pray  noc.  Forgive  us'ourtrcfpafTeSj/'.^. 
that  they  may  not  deferve  Death  )   Mr.  Buries  of  '/'tiflif, Ltn. 
ay,  ^4^.243.  thinks,  Thtj have  an  a^nal  Qmhobli£irtg  them /» 
tttrnalwrAth  mt  abfolHtelj  ,  hnt  covditiomlly  till  they  take  the 
me^ns  iff  inti  i  of  God  fer  their  pardon :  for  God  doth  not  ^ill  to 
them  falvAtion  vthile  they  abide  in  that  ft  ate.  Mr.  RejmlJj  (Life 
o/Cibr»/?,p4^.404.442,4+3,4^J  ^3>f^.  t\i^ytht7  certainly 
incur  Gods  diffleafure  And  credteA  merit  ofDratIo  ,  And  deferve 
DamnAtion/bftt  de  hc-O  bring  it  not.     Now/  all  this  opeperfi 
rot  mine  underftandmg  to  lee.  How  a  man  is  Rem  ntortU,  and 
yet  perfectly  juftified  (and  fo,non'condemnandids  etitm  in  fen- 
UntiaLegii)  at  the  fame  moment  of  time.     And  were  it  a 
thing  that  (hould  te  futurutp,  ("which  we  may  fuppofc  )  that 
he  (hould  dye  in  that  ftate,  whether  he  fhouM  be  jaftiHed  at 
Judgement,  and  fo  be  faved,or  not  ?  Sir,  though  1  refufe  not 
to  accept  your  further  Animadverfions  on  the  former  pointf, 
yet  (being  indeed  fatisfied  pretty  well  in  them)I  chiefly  intreat 
that  you  would  communica  te  to  me  your  thoughts  of  this  one 
Point  as  foon  as  you  can,  if  you  have  any  clear  way  to  dntyc 
the  knot :  and  if  your  Grounds  conduce  to  it  more  then  mine, 
I  (hall  like  them  better. 

Sir^  pardon  the  prolixity  here,  aud  Acrimony  elfwhere  of 

TcHr  unfeigned  well-  ^iltt  r, 

Richard  BaxteRp 


091) 


H  E  Reader  wnfi  undtrjiand  that  finct  thi 
H^riting  $f  this ,    /  havt  entitavcurtd  to 
clear  thu  point  inmy^irt^ions  for  Ptace 
ofConfcienct.  T»  which  now  J  add  hnt  thu^ 
that  hfidts  a  Plenary  Guilt  or  Remifflon^ 
there  feems  to  In  a  Guilt  and  Rgmiffion  that 
art  both  i>ut  imperfefl  and  of  a  middle  f^rt : 
that  u  ,  that  m  in  Pctcri  ati  of  jiu^  the  hahit  of  faith  remaineJ, 
'  fo  wtth  hu  Guilty  a  ftarc  of  fufisfieation  remained :   At  none  of 
bis  old /ins  returned  on  him,  ft  the  Covenant  of  Grace  upon  hif 
Habitual  Faith  did  hinder  the  Guilt  from  being  Plenary  or  fixe  ei, 
by  beginning  a  Remiffion  •    /  fear  not  to  call  it  an  imferfeU  Rf 
mi/fion  :  The  Law  doth  pronounce  Death  on  a  man  for  every  fin ^ 
f^  itii  fofar  in  farce  at  to  determine  that  Death  is  both  deferved 
and  due  to  this  man  fof  this  fin.  But  at  the  fame  injlant,  though 
after  in  order  of  nature,  the  Gofpel  that  ^iveth  pardon  to 'Belit- 
verss  doth  give  an  /mperfefl  pardon  to  D^y\d,  ?etcr  and  fueh 
Habitual  Believers  as  foon  as  they  fin^  before  Faith  and  Repen-' 
taucefor  that  fin  be  aEiuall ;   and  their  Pardon  will  become  pie- 
nary  whfn  they  aHually  Repent  and  Believe.     Their  Sin  is  like 
the  fault  of  a  Kings  Son  or  SubjeB^tbat  in  a  P  ajjton  psould  firikc 
the  King^  ^htn  jet  Habitually  he  hath  a  loving  Loyal  heart  to 
him.     He  deferveth  Death ^  and  bj  Law  it  may  he  his  dm  ;  but 
he  14  a  Sonfti&t  and  the  King  wiU  not  take  this  advantage  Mgainfi 
him,  though  he  wtU  not  fully  pardon  k'm^  till  he  fubmit  and  ia- 
ment  hu  Fault.     We  are  fiill  the  Children  of  God.notwithfiand- 
ing  thofefins  that  go  agtinji  the  Habitual  bent  of  our  Heart  f(  for 
thats  the  Tryal ;  )  but  muji  havi  actual  Faith  and  Repentance 
before  we  /hall  have  full  pardon :  fVhetheryou  will  call  that  Par- 
don  Which  the  Proutife giveth  upon  metr  habitual  Repentance,  A 
vertual  Pardon,  and  that  ^hich  it  givethon  actual  Repentance » 
an  adual  Pardon  ;  or  What  name  you  will  give  it^    Cleave  to 
eonfideration  j   but  compleat  it  is  not  in  a  cafe  of  hey  nous  ftn ,  till 
tA^ual  RepentoMCt :  Though  it  may  be  in  a  cafe  of  fame  *#»- 

Ece  3  kffown^ 


Op8) 

Iftiown^  unobftrvti  »r  forgotten  infirmitiet.     For  thi fttll  c$ni> 
HoH  is  Mtccftwy  to  a  fttll  T*4rdo)t.     1:1 1  is  nt4r  the  ttift  of  4  mtn 
that  hath  a  Patd^n  iranted  him  for  Afterder,  bm  far  ^nMvf 
fome  action  to  be  performed, he  hath  not  yet  poffeJJloH  oftt^And  cmh* 
'^^nvtjet  plead  it.     If  jon  ask.  ♦»'  *''^<f  {honU  become  of  fetch  a 
Imjin.if  hefo  die  befsre  Repentance ;      /  anfwer.     \ .     /  thinkjt 
"He  a  cafe  that  ruH  never  fall  out :    For  i .  GodU  as  it  veere  em- 
<iea£ed  bi  Love  and*Promife,  ttnd  by  giving  his  iniwelling  Spirit 
to  Believers ^  to  bring  them  to  Repentance.  2.  The  mw  Slattert 
#r  ViffffitioH  of  fuch  a  pemt  Will  not  fftfer  him  to  be  long  with' 
cut  Actital  Repentance  tat  lettfl  in  fome  me^fure  ;  efpec$Ally^heH 
"Death  fhall  lookjfim  in  thtf^ne,     I  doubt  not  bttt  David  did  re* 
pent  ir/or«  Ntcbtn  fp^  to  htm]  bttt  God  Would  not  takeitp 
^ith  fo  fhort  and  Jecret  a  Repentance  for  fo  great  ani  odious  m 
^rime.     2i  But  if  f9UC4nfr9veit  profitable  for  fuch'a  mM» 
'to  be  fuddinfy  cut  of  before  Retentancft  and  that  fuch  a  things 
net  II  be  y  I  fhmld  incline  to  thinkjhat  he  Will  be  fully  pardoned  of 
the  injfantcf  Death,  and  fofAved-j  becMufe  the  Lord  knoweth 
■that  he  repented  H/tbitually  Mndvertually ,  and  WouUleave  dan* 
it  actually,  if  he  had  had  time  for  confideration.     3.  Or  if  wt 
*jhould  conclude  th^t  god  hath  purpofeiy  left  men  af  fnehamir 
die  condttion^without  any  §ertainty  how  he  Will  deal  Withthem^ 
that  fo  no  man  maybe  encouraged  to  fin,  and  in  Impudeney,  I 
ihink^it  no  dangerous  Doctrine^  nor  inymrious  to  the  Bady  of  far 
ifing  Truth.     Aitd  thus  I  have  noW  (  many  years  fince  the  Wri- 
ting  of  the  foregoing  Papers  )  told  you  in  brief  Whatfatitfie^ 
m$cofreermng  this  difficult  point ,  for  the  reconciling  oftheguUt 
of  every  particular  fin ,  efpeeially  the  more  haynous  ,  with  thi 
DoEhine  of  perfeveri*jg,  uninterrupted  Jufiification.  Somewhat 
slfol  have  (aid  of  it  in  my  Papers  exprefing  my  Judgement 
aboat  ?itfcv<ttirsctjately  publ(/hed, 

Jan.  5.    1*57. 


THE  FOURTH 

DISPVTATION. 

.^.Whether  the  Fa  ith  which 
Paul  oppofeth  to  Works  in 
the  Point  of  fuMcatwn ,  be 
one  only  Phyfical  A^  of 
the  foul  ?  N'eq-. 

OR, 

Whether  all  Humane  ^Bs^  except 
one  Phyfical  (L/^S  of  Faith,  be  the 
Works  which  are  excluded  by 
Taul  in  the   Point  oi  fujlification  ? 

By  Richard  "Baxter. 

.  —     —  - 

•I* 


LON  DON, 
Printed  by  /t.w.for  Nevil  Simmons ,  Book- feller  in  Ke- 
dnminfter,  and  are  co  be  fold  by  him  ther&,  and  by  Nathd" 
nitl  Ekim  tctbeGonio!?(M/jChBrch-yar<i.  i6sS> 


(+oi) 


Queftioru  Whether  the  Faith  which 

Taul  oppofeth  to  JJ^orJ^  in  the 

Point  of  fujlijjcatmj  be  one  only 

Phyfical  Adl  of  the  Soull^g. 

OR^  Whether  all  Humane  Ads,  except  one 
Phyfical  A(5l  of  Faith,  be  the  Works  which 
arc  excluded  by  Taul  in  the  Point  of  Ju- 

ftification  <  Ncg, 


1  PUT  tbefe  two  Queftions  together  for 
brevity  and  Elucidation  of  the  Matter 
in  doubt ;  for  fo  in  eifcdl  they  are  but 
One.  avoiding  all  unneceffary  Ex- 
plication of  terms  concerning  which 
we  are  agreed^it  is  but  litde  that  I  have 
need  to  fay  for  your  undcrftanding  of 
the  fenfe  of  the  Queftion. 

i.It  isherefuppofed  that  P<rr«/ doth 
maintain  Juftlfication  by  taich,and  oppofeth  it  to  Juilification 

Fff  by 


(4.02.) 


by  the  works  of  the  Law:  and  fo  oppofeth  Salvation  by  Grace 
and  by  works.  2.  It  is  fuppofed  that  non  datur  rernMm, there  is 
no  n:iiddle  way  of  Juftificacion  befidcs  thefc  two,  bjfuith ,  or 
hy  PVorh  •  and  therefore  whatfoever  Acts  we  are  here  juftificd 
by,  it  muft  needs  follow,  that  thofe  Acts  arc  none  of  the 
[  PVorki  ]  that  Paul  here  fpeaketh  of  as  excluded  :  ana  wbac- 
Ibever  Acts  are  excluded  arc  none  of  the  Fa.th^  by  which 
Paul  telleth  us  here  that  we  are  juftified.This  we  are  agreed  on, 
and  foit  is  often  preflcd  by  my  Opponents  that  there  is  no 
third  way  j  which  I  grant  them.  But  note  that  i  do  not  there- 
fore grant  them  that  there  is  no  tertum^or  other  act  either  im- 
plycd  in  faith  ,  or  juhfervient  to  It  in  that  vfaj  of  J  uftihcation 
that  is  by  T4th  :  Ic  was  never  Pauls  meaning  co  exclude  all 
other  Gracious  Acts  relating  to  Chrift,  no  not  from  this  bud' 
ncfs  of  Juftification,  as  attendants  on  Faith,or  modifications  of 
it,  implycd  in  it,  or  fubfervient  to  it.    And  therefore  it  wiJl 
not  follow  that  any  third  thing  by  which  we  arc  thus  juftificd, 
is  either  Faith  or  PVorkj  i  but  only  that  is  not  H'ork.St  becaufe 
they  are  excluded. 

5 .  I  put  the  Phyfical  Act  whofe  Unity  we  fpeak  of,  in  con- 
tradiftinction  to  one  moral  Factjwhich  may  contain  many  Phy- 
fical Acts  :  fuch  as  Marriage,  which  is  one  in  a  civil  or  moral 
fenfcbut  many  Phyfical  Acts :  and  fuch  as  almoil  all  Contracts 
be ;  as  taking  a  man  to  b^  my  Prince.my  Coramander^my  Tu- 
ior,my  Phyfician,my  Councellor,^c.wh  ch  every  one  of  them 
contain  many  Phyfical  acts. 

4.  There  is  a  fourfold  Unit  y  here  to  be  difcerncd,that  the 
term  [[Owf  ]  may  be  underftood.     i.    A  general  Unity,  and 
this  is  not  it  in  queliion.We  are  agreed  that  mgenere  <«f/w,and 
in  generea^tfi  jecundi^  znd  i» ger:ere  aHuj  im/KaaeKtis,  Faith 
KhmOne,     2.  A  Unity,  of  the  lowefi6'f«w,  and  thQ  f»  peri 
ot  fpeciei.     3.    A  Unity  of  the  fpeciet  fpecialij/ima.      4,  A 
NhmtricalVnitj.  Our  Queftion  is  oftle  third  :  but  vet  be- 
caufe the /fc-^wJ  and /cw^'r^  are  alfo  controverted,  Kliallfpeak 
of  them  before  I  come  to  the  Queftion.  And  concerning  the 
■feunh  I  Aff^rr,  that  [[  The  F^iith  which  Paul  cppojnh  to  ffroykj 
tM  the  Pfiint  of  fuji ideation ^  ii  not  enljf  one  nhtntrtcal  JIQ  of  the 


(4-oO 


My  Opponents  in  this  (though  they  arc  unwilling  to  ap- 
pear in  the  oppofition  )  muft  needs  be  all  thofe  that  fay  Juftifi- 
cation  is  ftmnl&femel,  at  once  and  but  once,  and  that  it  is 
a  good  Argument  againll  any  ads  or  works  after  Faith  that 
[  They  exifl  not  till  rve  arejfijiifiedi  therefore  they  are  no  conditio 
ons  ofourfuJiific.iti:'n  :  ]  and  alhhofe  that  deny  and  fcorn 
thediftinc^ion  between  i.  Our  Juftificationatihefirft  f  or 
.putting  us  into  a  jullirtcd  ftate)  2.  And  our  daily  Jufiihcation 
by  theconrinuationof  that  ftate.  3.  And  our  frequently  re- 
iterated particular  juftification  from  the  Guilt  of  particular 
fins.  4.  And  our  final  Juflification  by  the  fentenccof  the 
Judge.  Efpecially  by  denying  the  fccondjthcy  muft  needs  de- 
ny ray  AfTercion,  as  Qiall  be  (liewed  anon. 

Argum.  I.  If  Paul  fpea'^not  only  of  fujiificatlon  as  begun ^ 
htit  as  ccnitKned,  then  the  F  -lith  rvhich  he  opp^fcth  to  Workj  is  not 
only  oic  Humtrical  ^'^El.  (  For  there  muft  needs  go  fonae  other 
Numerical  A  d  before  it,  or  elfe  the  per  Ion  could  not  be  jufti- 
fied  by  faith  before)  But  the  Antecedent  u  true^  as  I  prove 
horn  Rom,  Jif.  18,19,  and6'rf/.3.  If  /'rfar/prove  Juftificacionby 
faith  ,  from  the  Inftancc  of  Abrahams  believing  after  that  he 
was  juftified,then  he  fpeaketh  not  only  of  Juftification  ai  begun 
(  or  of  our  fi'  ft  Being  juftified  j  But  the  Antecedent  is  plain  in 
the  Text  compared  with  6'f«.  12. and  13  and  I4^and  i$- Abra- 
ham was  a  jaftihcd  n;an  before  he  believed  the  Promifc  of  Sa- 
r<i's  having  a  Son. 

ey4rgum.  2  If  a  true  "Believer  have  4  jt*fiifyi>ig  Faith  af- 
ter his  irfi  jHi}i\ic4tion^  even  as  long  as  he  liveth^  then  the  Faith 
Vehicb  Paul  cpp  -feth  to  rvorkj  ii  «»'  only  one  numerical  AH  (  be- 
caufe  that  firft  Numerical  Aft  doth  not  continue  with  us.  ) 
But  the  AvtecedcKt  u  true  i  as  appeareth  i.  from  the  fore- 
mentioned  In^srce  of  Abraham.  2,  f  rom  the  necelLty  of 
a  continued  ABtfe  juftification:  For  the  Pa/Jlve  elfe  would 
ceafe,  and  we  fhould  be  unjuftified.  if  God  did  not  continue 
tofoigive  us,  and  ftill  aftively  repute  us  juft,and  accept  us  as 
juft  and  impute  Righteoufnefs  to  us,  and  his  ^ Jofpel-Grant 
did  not  continually  juftifie  us,  (  as  every  f«W<«wff»r//w  conti- 
nually cauleth  the  Relation  J  wefhould  ceafe  to  be  juitifiad  : 
And  Gods  aftive  Juftification  continueth  not  without  the  con- 

Fff  2  tinuancc 


C404-) 


tinuance  of  mans  Aftual  or  Habitual  Faith  .-  Otberwlfc  he 
(hould  juftifiean  Infidel  ,  and  he  fhould  juftifie  afterwards 
in  another  way,and  on  other  terms  then  he  did  at  firft.3.Froni 
the  continued  Efficacy  of  Chrifts  Merits,  Inrerceflion  and  Co- 
venant, which  daily  juftitie  us.  So  that  he  that  faich,  that  he 
was  never  juftified  but  once  at  one  raomcnt,and  by  one  nume- 
merical  Ad  of  Faith,  rauft  fay  that  Cbrift  was  his  Juftificr  adu- 
ally  but  for  a  raoment,and  that  he  will  not  be  beholden  to  hint 
to  juftifie  him  any  more. 

And  yet  that  no  man  may  have  a  pretence  of  quarrelling 
about  meer  words,  that  hath  a  mind  to  it,let  it  ftill  be  remem- 
bred,  that  as  the  word  f  Juftification  ]  is  ufcd  ro  fignifie  the 
firft  making  a  man  juft  that  was  unjuft  (relatively  or  qualita- 
tively,) So  I  confefs  that  God,  that  Chrift,  that  the  Covenant 
do  juftifie  us  Univerfally  but  once  ^though  particularly  from 
particular  fins  often i  And  thus  It  is  but  one  Ad  of  Faich  by 
which  we  are  juftified  Relatively,  and  not  the  Habit  at  all. 
But  as  Juftification  is  taken  for  the  fame  Ad  continued 
(  though  the  mutation  onus  be  not  aheodem  ttrmim  )  fo  wc 
are  juftified  every  moment,  and  have  a  juftifyin^  faith  conti- 
nually, and  are  juftified  by  the  Habit,  at  leaft  as  much  as  by 
the  Act,  and  in  fome  refped  more.  The  Sun  doth  as  truly 
Illumintre  our  part  of  the  world  all  day  after ,as  at  Sun  rifing, 
and  by  the  fame  Action  or  Emanation  in  kind  :  But  as  Hlumi- 
Tjating  is  taken  for  turning  night  into  day  ,  or  illuminating  the 
dark  world  from  its  darknefs,fo  it  doth  only  illuminate  it  from 
break  of  day  to  Sun  rifing.  Your  Leafe  of  your  houfe  or  Land 
dot  hfirft  make  you  a  Tenant  of  no-Tenant  at  the  firftfealing 
and  delivering  :  but  it  may  by  thelhme  fort  ofadion  conti- 
nue your  Right  tiii  it  expire,  and  fo  continue  you  a  Tenant ; 
And  thus  we  arc  continually  juftified  by  God,  by  Chrift,  by  the 
Covenant  and  by  Faith. 

Now  as  to  the  fecond  kind  or  matter  of  Unity  (  of  an  Infe- 
rior Genus  and  Superior  [pedes  ;  )  this  is  two- fold.  i.  As 
the  Acts  of  mans  foul  are  fpecified  and  denominated  from  the 
Fa'-fthiesOY  PoWers  :  or  (  if  any  deny  that  realdiftinction  of 
faculties)  from  the  Objects  of  Intellection, VolitroD,  c^f.ge- 
nsrflly  confidered.     2- As  the  acts  of  the  foul  are  fpecified 

by 


by  x\\i\tfpeclalOhjtUs  ( though  not  fpecisi  fpecUii£im£.  )  As 
to  che  former,  the  queftion  is  one  of  thefe  two  (  which  you 
will  in  terms,  for  they  are  one  in  fenre  )  pvhethtr  the  ah  of 
Faith  which  Paul  opfofeth  to  ^orks  in  fttfiijication^he  only  an  aii 
of  the  Inte/Ieci,or  only  an  aU  of  the  Will  /  Or,  iVhtther  it  have, 
only  Entity  and  Verity,  or  only  Goodnefsfor  its  Objert  ?  And  m 
the  fccond  cafe  the  Queftion  is  this,  whether  God  alont^  or 
Chriji  Alone,  or  the'TrotfiifealonC',  or  Pardon  or  RighteoHJntfi 
alone ^  cr  Heaven  alone,  &c.  be  the  Oi>']e^  of  that  Faith  ^'hich 
Paul  oppofeth  to  workj  in  fullific.ition. 

But  the  thing  intended  in  our  Queftion  is  de  fptcie  fpecialif- 
fima,  tPhethir  it  be  but  one  fpeci.il  aSi  which  Paul  oppcfth  to 
Workj  in  JuffifiC'ition,  i^erc  are  three  more  Propofitions  that 
I  fliall  handle  in  order,  though  the  laft  only  beneceLfary  to 
me. 

Propofition  2.  The  Faith  nhichViu\  oppofeth  t9  rvorkj in 
fuJiific.itioK  ,  id  not  «nly  an  Act  of  the  Inteilfettnor  only  of  the 
Will.  •  ^ 

I  fhall  fay  but  little  of  this,  bccaufc  I  have  among  Prote- 
ftants  but  few  Adverfaries.  The  Papifts  indeed  feat  it  in  the 
Ir.tcllciS  only  :  and  fo  doth  CAmcro  (calling  it  a  Perfwafion  } 
and  fome  few  Pioreftants :  fome  few  ochers  (  as  Amtfuis  ■■ 
fomenmes)  pliceiconly  in  the  Will,  and  take  Aflent  to  be 
but  a  prefuppofed  AA  :  and  they  call  it  Affiance,  or  fas 
y^wf/t'^jalfo  Elt^im,  Acceptance^  or  Co»/fKf,orembracing,or 
Recumbency,  orfuchlike.  P^w/'/ftaking  i  luth  and  Good- 
ncfsto  be  all  one,and  thcUnderftanding  and  Will  for  all  one, 
takes  alfo  Affent  and  Affiance  for  all  one ^  but  I  fliall  go  on  the 
fuppoftcion  that  his  fingular  opinion  is  commonly  difallawed  ; 
however  the  iVof/y?]f,  and  many  others  deny  the  realDiftttv- 
dion  of  Faculties,  The  common  Vote  of  PfoceftdtTt  Dk- 
vinesis,that  Faith  is  in  both  Faculties,  the  Intdled  and  Will,, 
and  hath  foricsobjrA  the  Entity  of  Chrifts  perl'an,  and  che 
Verity  of  the  Gofpcl,and  the  goodnefs  of  Chrift  and  hts  bene- 
fi'sciVred,  which  Faith  accepteth.  Divennnts  -xVortis  arc 
plain  and  true,  Decer-m.  Qu.38.pag.174.  Jnactu  fi^'eijujiifi" 
eantis  totaa>nma  fe  convertit  ad  caufattt  ittjlificanttnt  :  And 
qu.  37,  pag.  1^6.     Fides  ilU  ^uim   Scriptnra  agnofcit  ha- 

F  f  f  J  '"  lit 


bet  infe  complicatum  aClnm  Voluntatis  &  IntelleSlut'—-^  A'f  ^ 
nobis  Abftirdnm/ed  valde  confeKt^meum  vUetur  aClnm  ilium  <jho 
tot  A  anim^  purifcit.'^r  (^  jttftificatftr  edtetam  animam  pertint' 
re;  itaut in  nndo inttlleElH  habeat  iuitiftm  j  in  voluntatecom- 
pltmcntum. 

Argument  i.  The  OhjtEl  of  this  Faith  is  both  Truth  a)id 
goodnefs  :  Therefore  ic  is  the  ad  both  of  the  Intelled  and 
the  Will.  That  Truh  is  the  Object  of  it  is  evident,  i.  In 
that  the  Metaphyfkal  Verity  of  Chrifts  perfonistheObjeA 
of  it,  or  eife  Chrift  were  not  the  Ob jed  of  it.  2.  In  that  the 
moral  Verity  of  the  Gofpel,  I.  as  revealing  Chrift,  2.  aspro- 
raifing  pardon,  is  the  object  of  it,as  is  confeft,and  the  Scripture 
doth  fo  plentifully  declare,  that  it  were  fuperfluous  to  cite  the 
words. 

That  goodnefs  is  the  object  of  it,appearcth,i.In  that  Chrift 
as  Redeemer  ,Mediator,Saviour,is  the  object  of  it ,  and  that  is, 
Chrift  as  nccelTary  and  good  to  us.  It  is  Chrift  for  our  for- 
givenefs,  juftification  and  Salvation  ;  and  fo  under  the  formal 
notion  of  good.  2.  In  that  it  is  a  Proraife  as  a  Prom!fe(Tefta- 
mcnt,Grant,or  Deed  of  Gift)  thatis  the  Object  by  it.  And  it 
is  Eflential  to  thefe  to  be  good  to  us  as  well  as  True  :  and  the 
Truth  is  but  for  the  good.  3.  In  that  it  is  Pardon  Juftiticati- 
on  and  Life  eternal  finally,  that  are  the  object  of  it  ^  which  as 
fuch,  and  as  offered  to  us,  are  good.  If  I  thought  thefe  things 
needed  proof,  I  would  give  you  more. 

Argument  2.  The  Scripture  revealeth  to  us  that  this  Faith  id 
the  All  both  of  the  JnttlUB  and  the  fVill,  therefore  it  iafo.  That 
it  is  the  act  of  the  Intellect,  is  fo  plain  in  Scripturc,that  I  (liould 
accufe  my  fclf  of  wearying  you  with  necdlefs  work,  if  1  (hould 
go  about  to  prove  it.  The  Papifts  are  right  enough  in  thus 
much:  3ir\dDr.  Downawe  de  fujiific.  and  againft  Pemble  in 
Append,  to  Covenant  $f  grace ^  hath  proved  it  ac  large.  That  it 
is  an  act  of  the  WiSljOnr  Divines  have  fully  proved  againft  the 
Papifts  in  many  a  full  Difcourfe  J  i .  From  the  fenfe  oi '^'^vhv 

«■<  S^3",  xj  iii  •I'f7KJ'  Xp/ra>,  &  Tn^i  c*  T^  uifMriy    which  .'igni- 

fie  Affiance,  and  fuch  an  Affiance  as  is  the  act  of  the  Will  a« 
well  as  of  the  Intellect.   2.  becaufe  the  Scripture  ofcen  putteth 

[jVilling 


(4-07) 

[]fr»/A'»^]  as  equipollent  to  Believing-  in  Revel. 12.17.  ivhofoe' 
i/^r  Will>  let  him  tal^e  the  vff^teref  Life  freeh"]  whet e  fVt//inir 
and  Talking  are  both  acts  of  che  Will,  and  the  faith  in  quefti- 
on-,  fo  m  other  places.  3. The  Scripcure  callcth  it  by  the  name 
of  I\e€eivi»iChi'\i\^foh.i.i2.  Col. 2.6.  whch  is  che  Accep- 
tance or  confent  of  the  Will.  4-  The  Scripture  ofcen  makes 
Faith  to  be  the  Internal  covenanting  and  clofureof  the  heart 
with  Chrift,  which  is  the  ace  of  the  Will ;  an  J  therefore  ic  per- 
fwddeth  wi:h  the  Will  to  this  end  ;  and  accufeth  men  as  un- 
willing,and  calleth  them  llefurers,lSIeglecters,Slighters,llejec- 
tf.'rs,  Dcfpifersof  Chrift,  that  are  Unbelievers  (  privutively.  ) 
I  trouble  you  not  to  cite  che  Texts  as  beinp  needlefs,  and  done 
by  many.  Beiides  that  f  as  in  the  former  Argument  )  the  l-'ro- 
mife,Chrilt,Pardon,Life, and  other  good  things,  as  gt»od,  are 
ficquentlymide  the  Object  of  Faith. 

Argumeac  ^.  The  Veracity  of  God  is  the  forma!  Olfjfct 
of  Fiurh.  'But  the  Vtracit)  of  G}d  U  hU  Goodnsfs  (  or  partia- 
pHethat  leafl  Aimachof  h^s  Goodnefi  as  of  hisfVifdom  ani  hn 
PoWer :  )  therefore  the  G^odnefs  of  God  14  the  formal  Object  of 
Faith:  and  coyjjeqnentlj  it  ii  dnactof  thetVill.  God  cannot 
Ije^  htCAHfe  he  u  perfectly  good^xvife  and  ro\}ffr full. 

Obje^-  But(fiy  fome  Papirts)  AH  theft  acts  thdt  you  mention 
here^  are  Love  and  not  Faiih'.Fatth  doth  but  affent-,and  Love  con- 
fentethor  accepteth. 

Anfuf.  1.  Do  you  not  your  felves  call  it  fides  formata 
cbaritate  ?  And  why  then  may  not  we  call  it  faith  ?  2.  The 
Scrip:ure  callech  itFaichinthephrafes  formentioned,  Tngii  Iv 
7u  al'JM.-n  rn^c-liiv  liiy^i^iv,  (^c.  and  therefore  it  is  Faith. 
3.  Though  fometimes  in  other  cafes  the  Apoflle  diftinguifh 
Faith,  Hope  and  Love  5  yet  when  he  fpeaketh  of  Faith  as  ju- 
ftifying,  aad*s  the  form  of  a  Chriftian,  lie  comprehendeth 
Love  to  Ghrirt  as  Saviour  in  it,  and  a  confidence  in  him  ,  fuch 
as  in  com.nfion  Language  we  call  Hope.  As  Love  (Igmrteth 
the  PalHonof  the  foul,  ic  may  be  a  confequent ;  but  as  it  is  but 
t\itvelleChrifium^C^  heneficiaobUta  ,  fo  it  is  faith  it  felf,  as 
Aiaccoviui  and  Chamier  have  truly  told  the  Papifts.  It  W4s  a 
fiiihin  Chrift  (though  beginning  to  finkjchats  cxprefled  Luk. 

24.3.1,. 


(4o8) 

I^e^ji'^.  1  [  ^«f  ^*  truftdthat'u  had  bten  he  that/honld  hive 
redeemed  I [rAel.'\  Our  Iranflators  have  put  We  Trujied  tor 
^e  Hoped^  becaufe  they  thought  the  figniftcation  the  fame, 
or  elfe  chcy  would  not  (urc  have  done  in.  And  when  the 
Apoftlc  faitbjthat:  E"?7^';-7j  ik-ni^ouiva"  J^px^iJ,  Heh.  1 1.  i.  If 
we  may  denominate  rhe  a(f\  from  the  Objed ,  we  may  fee  thac 
he  there  makes  Faith  and  Hope  to  be  co-eiTential.  And  when 
Chrift  is  called  Xf;st\  »  'fc/^>  ii/^f,  Chrift  our  Hope,iZ  feems  hope 
there  is  but  an  aS  of  Faith.  And  fo  2  Cor,  1 .10.  i  Tim. 4. 
10.  To  H<?pr  i»  God  or  {'hrlji^  or  p«f  our  Hope  in  him^  fecm- 
eth  to  me  all  one  as  to  pat  our  Tru(i  in  him  for  future  Mercy  ^ 
whichis  Faith.  To  which  is  oppofed  i  1  im  6.17-  ptting our 
Hope  in  riches,  fo  I  Cor.  15.19.  to  have  Hope  in  Chrifi^tto  the 
Septuagint,  Pfal.  42.  26.  ihTTjcov  k-m  -nv  Q-lv :  Q  Hope  in  God^'2 
is  a  Complication  of  Paith  and  Hope  in  one  wordj  and  tran- 
flacedbyus,  TrufiinGod. 

4.  Though  the  Willing,  Confent  or  Acceptance  of  an  of- 
fered Benefit,  have  truly  fomewhatof  Love  in  ir,  yet  Love  is 
not  the  proper  name  of  that  Act. Every  Volition  is  iiot  ufaally 
called  Love. 

Prop.  3 .  his  not  not  only  God  the  Father^  nor  only  Chnfi  the 
Redeemer  i  nor  only  the  Tromife  ^  nor  only  par  don ,  or  Ri^hteouf- 
nefs,  or  Heaven^  that  is  the  ohjeU  of  that  faith  ^hich  Paul  oppo- 
feth  to  Tvorks  »>?  ^fijiification. 

Argument  \.\{  many  or  all  thefe  art  fo  linked  together,  thac. 
to  believe  one  of  them  as  revealed  in  Scripture ,  is  to  believe 
more  or  all,  then  it  is  not  any  one  of  them  alone  that  is  the 
objed  of  that  Faith  which  Paul  oppofeth  to  works.  But  the 
ey^ntecgdent  IS  true,a$  is  evident,  e.  g.  To  believe  in  Chrift ^\s  to 
believe  the  promife  of  the  Gafpel  concerning  Chri^.  For  there 
is  no  ^f//f/without  a  "^ord  of  revelation  to  believe.So  that  here 
Chrift  and  the  Promife  are  neceffarily  conjunct, and  Chrift  and 
the  Gofpcl  Hiftory.  And  to  believe  the  Go  ffiel  with  a  Divine 
Faith,  is  to  'Selisve.godt  veracity  ,  and  to  believe  the  *.jofpcl 
becaufe  of  Gods  Veracity  :  For  this  is  the  Ohji^um  formate 
without  which  there  is  no  faith.    So  that  Believing  in  God  is 

effential 


C4-°?) 


elTentiai  to  all  Divine  faith.   Alfo  materUS;  ^  to  'Stiievi  U 

Chrif},  is  to  Bttieve  in  him  at  9ur  Saviour ,  to  fave  m  from  the 
^uUe  of  fin,  even  as  to  hlitvc  in  a  I'hjfitittn  is  to  Truft  on  him 
to  cure  us  oi  our  Difeafes.  So  forf^tveneft  of  fin,  being  an  end 
cdential  CO  Chrifts  Office,  ic  is  efiencul  to  our  Faith  in  Chrift. 
So  aifo  to  believe  in  Chnft  as  a  Saviour,  is  to  be!  eve  m  him  m 
one  thjit  ii  able  anJ  mlling  to  reconcile  f^,and  bring  US  to  the/tf- 
vour  of  God  :  And  fo  C^o^  and  his  favour  and  Reconciliation 
with  him  are  ends  eflential  to  the  office  of  a  Saviour  fas  health 
is  to  the  Phyficiansjand  therefore  they  areeffencial  to  our  Be- 
lief  m  A  Saviour .  The  fame  may  be  faid  of  eternal  Life  ;  ^o 
thHtyoumay  fee  that  thefe  haveertcncial  refpcds  to  one  ano- 
ther, and  Chrift  cannot  be  believed  in  alone  without  the  reft 
as  co-efTcntiais  refpedively  in  the  obj :  d  of  our  f.«»ith  Nor  cao 
ihcPromife  be  believed  without  believing  in  the  Promifer  and 
Promifed. 

Argumenr  2.  The  Scripture  rffft  txf^fflr  ntaketh  m4ny  fucft 
Ob'leS^s  ofthj-tf^ith  which  ]^i\l\oppgfetb  to  vfork^s  in  fnfltficatttn  j 
therefore  fo  mufi  v>e, 

Rom. ^.22,24,25^26.  There  are  exprefl  mentioned  all 
thefe  Oojccts  of  juftifying  faith,  i.  The  Righuoufmfs  of  God, 
2,  The  Perfon  offifiu  Chrift^  % .  Redemption  by  Chrift  ,  anJ 
hii  fro'si  iatory  blood.  4.  Remfiion  of  fins  faft,  y.  God  at  4 
fuftifiir  of  Believer  t  -,  fee  the  Text. 

Rom  4  3,5.6,7,8,17  20,21,24,25  There  arc  all  thefe  ob- 
jects of  Juftifying  faith  expreffed,  even  when  the  work  of  Ju- 
ftification  is  defcribed.  i .  God  as  Revealtr  and  true  :  2.  Goi 
Oi  fufiifier.  3 .  Righteoufnefs  -,  impntation  of  tt\  fergivenefs  of 
fin^not tmputir,gie.  4.  Godas  Omnifcent.  5.  Uod  as  Omnipo' 
tenf.  6.  Jeffts  our  Lord,  7.  The  death  of  Chrtf  for  onr  offences. 
8.  The  Refurre^ionofChriji  forourjM(tification.  9.  God  at 
tkeraifer  ofChriji  from  the  Deal  Read  the  words,  and  you 
(hall  find  them  all  exprefly  mentioned.  I  think  it  fuperfluous 
to  cite  more  Texts. 

Prop.4.  Thefatih  rvhich  Paul  oppofeth  to  rvorkj  fi  the  bttftnefs 
of  Jttfitficat.on,  i-s  not  any  one  fif}gle  Physical  a^  in  Specie  fpe- 
cialilfima:  Nor  ^at  tt  ever  the  mea^'t'^g  of  Paul  to  exclude  aH 
M^t  exeept  fomc  fmh  one,  from  fulUfcation ,  nnder  the  name  of 
^crkt,  G  g  g  ^Qt 


f<[^?l'6) 


for  the  proof  of  this,  it  is  done  already,  if  any  one  of  the 
three  former  Propofitions  be  proved.  To  wh;ch  I  add  Argu- 
ment I.  from  An  injlance  of  fame  other  fa^'ticulars.  If  any  or 
all  the  following  particular  Acts  be  fuch  as  are  not  to  be  recko- 
ned with  works-,  then  i::  is  no  otic  act  alone  that  Paul  oppofeth 
to  works,  Bat  all  Of  fome  of  the  following  aces  are  (ucli  as 
are  not  to  be  reckoned  with  works  excluded.  Ergo^c^c. 

Eg.   I .  An  AfTcnt  to  the  truth  of  the  Gofpcl  in  general  as 

the  Word  of  God.  2.  A  belief  on  Gods  Veracity  in  this  expreft. 

:^.  An  AfTent  to  the  Truth  or  the  Word  that  tellethus  that 

Chrift  is  God. 4.  An  Aflentto  the  truth  of  the  Article  ofChrifts 

Manhood.     5.  An  Aflentto  the  Truth  of  the  Article  of  his 

conception  by  the  Holy  Ghoft,  and  being  born  of  a  Virgin. 

6.  And  to  the  Article  of  his  being  born  without  original  fin  in 

himfelf.  7.  And  to  the  Article  of  his  finlefs  holy  life.  8. And  to 

the  Arcicle  of  his  adual  death.    p.And  that  this  death  wasTor 

our  fins.    10.  And  that  God  hath  accepted  it  as  a  fufficicnt 

ilanfom/acrificeor  Attonement.     11.  And  that  he  adujlly 

rofe  again  from  the  dead,and  overcame  death,  i  2.  And  that  he 

is  the  Lord  and  King  of  the  Church,     i;;.  And  that  he  is  the 

Prophet  and  Teacher  of  the  Church.   14.  And  that  he  is  a- 

kenied  into  Heaven  and  Glorilicd>God  and  n]4in.i5.  Andthar 

he.isnowour  Interceflor  &  Mediator  with  the  Facher..i6.;And 

ihac  he  hath  purchafed  by  his  Ranfom  and  given  or  offered  in 

the  Gofpel,the  free  pardon  of  fin.  17.  And  that  he  hath  aUb 

purchafeJ  &  offered  us  eternal  life  in  Glory  with  God.  18.  And 

LhaL  its  !he  members  of  Chiift,  and  of  the  Holy  Catholick 

Church,that  fhall  partake  of  pardon  and  life  by  Chiift.  1 9  And 

that  he  will  give  us  the  Refurredion  of  life  at  Iaft.20.And  that 

iK  will  judge  the  world.   I  have  omitted  our  fpecial  I^elief  in 

God  the  Father  as  Creator.and  in  the  Holy  Ghoft  ,   and  have 

given  yoj  in  thefe  twenty  Afl:s,no  more  then  what  is  contained 

in  this  one  word,  \_J  believe  in  Chr[ft  en  Cior:fl']  I. think  there  rs 

if  any,  bm  few  that  arc  not  effi;ncial  to  Faith  in  Jefus  Chrift  a:s 

the  Saviour.  And  all  thefe  ads  of  affent  are  pares  of  the  faith 

t!)at  is  the  means  ofourjuftification;  and  none  of  them  part  of 

the  excluded  works.  And  bcfides  all  thefe  there  ate  as  many 

adj  of  the  Will  as  of  the  Intelled  concurring  in  or  to  this  vc- 


(4^0 


ry  affent,  fo  that  there's  twenty  more. For  its  plain,  that  feeing 
the  obj'eds  of  all  thefe  are  Good  as  weJi  as  True ,  they  being 
all  Truchs  concerning  our  bcneficand  Salvation,  the  Will  'C 
felf  in  the  Intelleds  aflfenting,  doth  command  it  to  aflVnr,  and 
alfo  doth  pisce  a  certain  Affiance  in  the  Revealer, which  we  call 
in  Englifti  crediting  or  Giving  credit  to  oncy  we  rffi  our  felves' 
upon  his  Truth.  As  I  fa  id  bsforc,Fcracity  is  Gods  Goodnefs^ind 
Veracity  is  the  formal  Objft  in  every  one  of  the  other  Acts 
aboutthe material Obj  cc ;  and  thereforethe  Will  muftact 
upon  FeracujAnd  io  have  a  part  in  aflent  it  felf ;  not  as  affent, 
but  as  a  Volttntar-jj  ajfest,  and  as  an  ajfent  to  Pr»mifes  or  Reve- 
lations of  good  to  pu.   There  is  goudncfs  in  the  word  of  Revela- 
tion fubordinate,  or  in  order  to  the  good  Revealed.    And  fo 
there  is  an  ace  of  the  fVillupon  the  good  in  the  Word,  compli- 
cated with  che  Intellects  Affcn  ..bcfidesthetollowing  fuller  act 
ofthe  Will,uponChriltandthe  benefits themf  Ives. And  there- 
fore there  is  a  twofold  Affiance     I.  An ASi^ncc'^n Gods Ttrx' 
city  a6the  Revealtr.   2.    An  A^aucq  in  Chrifi  the  C^Udtator, 
as  the  be^ovftr  ^    accomp/if^jcr  and  a6lfial  Saviour  or  Deliverer 
according  CO  his  Office  aud  Covenant.     Thefirftis  an  act  of 
the  Will  concurring  with  Aflent.  And  of  this  Frw^/^y  opinion 
is  neer  Truth,though  not  fully  it-  For  here  A  ftiance  is  as  clofe- 
ly  joyned  with  Aftent  as  Heat  in  the  Sun  with  Light,    though 
they  are  noc  the  fame.  But  then  the  fecond  fort  of  Affiance 
followethAfi'ent,  and  hath  another  act  of  the  Will  inrcrce- 
ding,whichis  Confentor  accepranceof  the  Benefit  offered; 
which  alfo  is  clofely  conjunct  with  the  firfl  act  ofthe  Will. And 
then  followetb.  laft  of  all  affiance  in  Chrift  for  the  performance 
ofthe  undertaken  acts.     And  thefe  latter  arc  alfo  many  parti- 
cular Phyficalicts,  as  the  objects  f«  fpecie  fpecUliJJifftaarerai' 
ny.  And  yet  ail  thefe  make  but  one  object  in  a  moral  fenfe,ind 
fo  but  one  acr,and  are  done  in  a  few  moments  of  time  of  which 
after.  Would  it  not  be  too  tedious,  I  (hould  ftay  to  cite  feve- 
ral  Texts,  to  prove  that  never  a  one  of  all  thefe  acts  is  exclu- 
ded as  works  by  Pattl.  But  of  divers  of  them  its  before  proved 
from /?«»».  ".and  4.  and  of  more  in  Hr^.  11,  and  in  (7/{/.  3. 1,5^ 
7,8,9,i3,i4vM,i6,i8,2o,ti,2».    There  arc  at  leaft    thefe 
Objects  of  Judifying faith  cxpreffed.  i.Ckrijis  Per/on  ,z,  that 

Ggg  2 


he  \Vyi/  the  feeipr9mlfed.  3 .  That  he  ft?4^  crucifieJ.  4.That  this 
Vfit  for  our  fins.  5.  That  hi  Vf>as  made  a  eurft  for  tu  in  thu  his 
death.  6 .  That  herehj  he  Redeemed  us  from  the  curfe.  7.  That 
he  is  the  MedtAtor.  S.^odoi  the  Party  With  Whom  he  is  Afedia' 
tor.  9.  Codas  Believed  in  hit  Promife.  10.  God  off  tsjiifier. 
1 1 .  The  Cj  off}  elf  reached  ^and  the  Promife  made.  12.  "Bleffedneft 
hyChrifl.  1^.  The  confirmed  Covenant.  l^The  IniofritaKce, 
l<^.  Righteoptfnefs.  1 6.  Adoption.  17.  Th^t  Belief  is  the  means, 
and  betieverf  the  rubje6t5  of thefe  benefits. All  thcfe  objeds  of 
Faith  you  will  find  in  the  Text. 

Argumcnc  2.  Ex  natura  ret.  If  other  acts  of  faith  in  Chrift 
Are  no  more  works  then  that  one  (whatfoever  it  be)  which  you 
will  fay  Paul  oppofeth  to  works,  then  Paul  doth  not  call  tbem 
works  or  number  them  with  works.     But  the  ^y^ntecedent  is 
true,  therefore  fo  is  the  Confeejuent.    Doubtlefs  the  Scripture 
calls  them  as  they  are  :  and  therefore  if  they  arc  not  works,  it 
calls  them  not  works.  And  for  the  ^«rr«^f «f ,    i.liby  tvorf^t 
you  mean  the  Keeping  of  the  firft  Covenant  by  finlefs  obedi- 
ence.fo  neither  the  one  or  the  other  are  works.   2.  If  you  mean 
the  keeping  of  Aiofes  Law,  fo  neither  of  them  are  vcork^s.    3.  If 
you  mean  the  performance  of  an  act  of  obedience  to  any  Prs- 
ceptofGod,  fo  the  feveral  acts  are  worj^j  ,  but  juftifie  not  as 
acts  of  obedience  to  the  command  ( thats  but  their  matter  ) 
but  as  the  condition  of  the  Promife.   4.  If  you  mean  that  they 
are  A^s  of  the  foul  of  man ,  fo  every  act  of  Faith  is  a  work, 
though  it  juftifie  not  as  fuch,  fo  that  here  is  no  difference  to  be 
found.  E,g.     If  you  make  the  Believing  in  Chrift  as  Dying, 
(though  you  take  in  both  affent  and  affiincc)  tobethe  only 
juftifyingact ;  what  reafon  can  you  give  why  our  Believing  in 
Chrift  incarnate,  in  Chrift  obeying  the  Law ,   in  Chrift  rifing 
sgain,  and  Glorified  and  Interceding,  in  Chrift  actually  now 
i  giving  out  the  pardon  of  fin  snd  ^doption,  e^r.    fliould  be 
called  rvorks  any  more  then  our  Believing  in  Chrift  as  crucifi- 
ed ?  No  reafon  at  all,  nor  any  Scripture  can  be  brought  for  it. 
Yea  what  reafon  have  you  that  our  Believing  in  Ciirift  as  the 
r^yfitian  of  our  fouls,  to  cure  us  of  our  fins  ,  and  clcmfe  cur 
hearts,  and  fanctific  our  Natures,  and  in  Chrift  as  the  Teacher 
and  Guide  of  our  fouls  to  life  eternal,  (liould  be  called  works 

any 


(+iO 


any  mor«  then  the  other  ?  Or  that  believing  in  Chrifts  biood 
for  everlafting  Life  and  happinefs,  fliould  be  any  more  called 
works  then  believing  in  his  blood  for  Juftificaton  ?  Yea  that 
Believing  in  him  as  the  King,  and  Head  ,  and  Captain  of  his 
Church  to  fubdue  their  enemies,  and  by  his  Governraenc  con- 
duft  them  to  perfeverancc  and  to  Glory,  fliould  any  more  be  . 
called  wori^  then  believing  on  him  as  crucified  in  order  to  for-  r 
givenefs? 

Argnmetit  3.  All  ads  Effcntial  to  faith  in  Chrift  ai  Chrift, 
are  oppofed  to  works  by  Panl  in  the  point  of  Juftification.and 
arc  not  the  works  oppofed  to  Faith.  But  many  acts  are  erten- 
tial  to  faith  in  Chrift  as  Chrift  ^  therefore  they  are  many  ads 
that  are  oppofed  to  works;  and  no  one  ofthofe  acts  is  the 
works  excluded. 

The  ALjor  is  proved  thus :  If  faith  in  Chrift  as  fuch,  be  it 
that  Prfw/oppofeth  to  works,  then  every  eflential  part  of  it  m 
by'T'rfw/oppofed  to  works  (for  it  is  not  faith  in  Chrift  if  it 

want  any  effcntial  part  j  But  the  Antecedent  is  true.  6rgo. • 

The  'JMir.ar  I  have  proved  in  the  firft  Difputation :  Though 
fometime  it  is  faid  to  be  {J>j  faith  in  his  hlood~\  that  we  have 
remiffion  of  fin ;  and  fometime  that  we  are  juftified  if  yce  h- 
iteve  in  him  that  raifed  Chrifl  from  the  dead ,  &c.  Yet  moft 
frequently  it  is  faid  to  be  by  faith  in  (^hrifi  ;  6j  belteving  in  the 
Lord  lefuj,  receiving  Chrifl  Jefm  the  Lord  &c.  Beltve  in  the 
Lord  Jefui^  And  thou, (halt  be  faved ,  was  the  Gofpel  preached 
to  the  Jaylor,-'i<??j  16.  But  this  is  fufficiently  proved  already. 
That  many  acts  are  eflfential  to  faith  in  Chrift  as  fuch,  is  alio 
proved  :  and  particularly,  that  believing  in  him  as  our  Tea- 
cher, Lord,  and  as  Rifing,  Interceding,  and  Juftifying  by  fen- 
tence  and  Gift,  as  well  as  believing  in  him  as  dying  for  our  ju- 
ftificaiioB.  As  Chrift  is  not  Cbritt  (as  to  his  Office  and  work) 
without  thefe  E(Tentia!»^,fo  faith  is  not  the  Chriftian  faith  with- 
out ihefeads. 

l?ut  here  obfcrve  that  though  I  fay  thefe  ads  of  faith  are  not 
the  works  which  VauI  cxdudeth,  I  (peak  of  them  as  they  are^ 
and  not  as  thev  are  mifunder^ood  :  For  if  any  man  fhould 
imagine  that  Believing  in  Chrift  is  a  Legal  Meritorious  work, 
and  thut  can  juftifie  him  of  or  for  it  felf  •,  1  will  not  deny  but. 

Ggg  3  ha 


C4-H) 


he  may  fo  make  another  thing  of  faith,  Vflcl  fo  bring  ^c  amotrj^ 
excluded  ivorks  (if  it  be  pofiible  for  him  to  bdie^c  concradi- 
dories :  )  But  then,  this  is  a«  rrue  of  one  ace  of  Faith  -aV  anb* 
ther:  If  a  man  imagine  that  its  thus  Meritorious  to  "Believe  in 
Chrift  as  purcbafing  him  Jullifica^ion,  it  is  as  much  the  exclud- 
ed works,  as  to  think  it  Meritorious  to  Believe  in  him  as  our 
Teacher,  or  King  and  Judge,  that  will  lead  us  to  final  Abfolu- 
tion  ,  andadually  juftifie  us  by  his  Sentence  at  that  Judge* 
menr. 

Argument  4.  Thofeafts  of  Faith  that  are  neceflary  to  Ju- 
ftificaiion,  are  none  of  the  works  that  Paul  excludeth  from  Ju- 
ftification  funlcfs  changed  by  raifundcrftanding.  as  aforefaid.^ 
But  other  acts  of  faith  as  well  as  one  are  neceffary  to  Jaftifi. 
cation  :  6rgo»^ 

The  (JMinor  f  which  only  is  worthy  the  labour  of  a  proof) 
I.  is  proved  before,  and  in  the  firft  Difputation.  t.  And  it  is 
confeffed  by  my  Opponents,  that  fay  j^  Fait^>  in  chrift  as  Tia- 
cher,Ki»g^^c.  ftff^f  fides  quae  Juftificat,  ami  the  condition  of 
JufltficatioH^  as  Repentance  atfo  is ,  though  it  be  not  the  InftrH' 
mental  caufe,  as  they  think^fome  other  AEi  is*  Paul  doth  not  ex- 
clude that  which  he  makes  neceflary. 

Argument  $.  That  which  makes  not  the  Reward  to  be  of 
Debt  and  not  of  Grace,  is  none  of  the  works  that  T<««/ fets 
faith  againft.  But  ether  aicts  of  faith  in  Chrift  do  not  make  the 
reward  to  be  of  Debt  and  not  of  Grace  any  more  then  tbe  one 
•  act  which  you  will  choofe  (E.g.  Believing  in  Chrift  as  King 
and  Teacher,  any  more  then  believing  in  him  as  a  Ranfom  :  ) 
therefore  they  arc  not  the  works  that  Tanls  fets  faith  againft. 
The  CM:ajor  is  proved  from  the  DeTcription  of  the  excluded 
works, /Jew. 4. 4.  The -^/«or  is  evident. 

Argument  6.  All  ads  of  Faith  in  Chrift  as  our  fftfiifer,  are 
fuch  asareoppofed  to  works  by  ?<«»/,  and  are  none  of  the 
works  which  faith  is  oppofed  to.  But  they  are  more  then  one 
or  two  thai  are  Ads  of  faith  in  Chrift  as  |uftifier:£r^<;.— ^ 

The  Major  I  think  will  be  granted;  the  Minor  is  platn  :  For 

I.  Chrift 


i.Ctfcift  ji#tfi€diB$  raeritorioufly  as  a  Sacrifice. 2.  And  as  Os 
beyingftnd  fulfilling  th«  Law.  3.  -As  thccoraplcmenc  of  hi 
fatijfa(Sion,,and  the  entrflticc  upon  his  tollowing  execution* 
his  Rejection  juftifiecb (lis.  4.  As  the  Heavenly  Prieft  a*^ 
Gods  right  hand,  he  juftifiet-ti-as^b^btsIftCsrceflion.  5  A^ 
King  and  Head,  he  juftirierh  us  by  his  Covenant  orLawo^ 
Grace.  <  6.  As  King  and  judge  he  juitiffeth  us  byfentence* 
7,  As  Prophet  he.ccacheih  us  the  Do(Srine  of  Juftification* 
and  how  to  attain  to  Jult^fication  by  fexitencc.  So  that«c 
I  ieaft,.rK>ne  of  thcfe  ate  the  e»cl*jded  work? . 

^  ArgHms  ji  \i  the  whole  Encncc  oLChriftian faith  be  o|>- 
pofed  to  work?,  and  fo  be  none  of  thfe  oppofed  Works  in  the 
matter  of  Salvation,  then  its  fo  alfo  in  the  matter  of  Jaftifica- 
twn.  But  the  Antecedent  ii-tcue  ;  therefore  fo  is  the  Confe- 
quent. •         ■    y*  ^    '    ,    ■    .  .;  .  > 

.  The  Mrnoc  is  confefled  hy  my  Opponents. .,  The  ,confe- 
quence  of  the  Mlajor  I  prove,  i.  Becaufe  Salvation  is;  as 
free  as  Juftification)and  ho  more  of  works  which  P<««/ exclu<i- 
^tb.  2.  Salvationcomprehendeth  JuRifiGation;  and  Gl.o- 
fifiijation  hath  the  fame  conditions  as  final  Juftification  ac 
Judgement,^  ic  being  part  of  Juftification  to  adjudge  that 
Glory.  3.:  The  exprefs  Scriptqre  excludes  works  as  much 
from  Salvation  as  from  Juftification  .*  Epb.2.  8,9.  For  bj 
Cjraci  ye  an  favedthrongh  faith  ;  ^«J  thAt  not  of  your  [elves, 
it  it  the  g^ift  of  Go^:  not  of  rvorkt^  lefi  any  wan  fjouU  boaft, 
Titl  -3.5,6,7.  [  liot  by  vforktof  RighteoHfne[s  which  ^e  h^ve 
iiontybnt  uccordorg  to  his  CP^tercy  he  f^vedus^  by  the  '^a/htficr  of 
Rf(;rer.Cratiey.,  aifdtherene^ingvf  the  Holy  Ghoji^  which  hejhid 
(ntH6  ^biintiantlj^  through  fefus  Chrifi  onr  Savionr^  that  being 
]uf}ifiecl  by  his  Grace ^  we P^ottld  he  m^de  Heirs  according  r;  the 
hope  of  eternal  Life,  ]  Many  fuch  places  are  obvious  to  any 
diljnent  Reader.  For  the  Minor  alfo  read  j  Cor.  i).i,"5j.4, 
5,6,  o^c.  ■  .■'.i!):n' 

A'^^nm.  8.   If  no  man  can  «<w»f  d»/ o»f  Ad  of  faith  that 
is  oppofed  to  all  the  re(i  as  mrksy  or  oppofed  to  works  when 

the 


a  1 6) 


tbe  reft  at'^  nor,  then  no  Tach  ching  I'c  Co  be  afferted.  Bat  no 
tnan  can  name  the  Ad  that  is  thus  oppofed  alone  Co  works.  i.Ie 
is  noc  yet  done  thac  I  know  of.  We  cannoc  gee  chem  to  tell 
OS  whac  Ad  ic  is.  z.  And  if  chey  do,  ocbers  will  make  as 
good  a  claim  co  cibe  Prerogative. 

Argum.  9.  -Tbey  that  oppofe  us  <  and  affirm  the  Qaeftion, 
do  feign  God  to  hare  a  ftrange  partiality  10  one  Ad  of  faith 
above  all  the  rcll,  without  any  reafon  or  aptitude  in  that  ad 
CO  be  fo  exalted.  But  this  is  noc  co  be  feigned  (and  proved 
itcannotbej  thatGod  fhouldannexour  Juftifica  ion  to  the 
Belief  in  Chrift  as  a  facrihcc  only-and  to  oppofe  this  to  belief  in 
bim  as  Rifing  Interceding,  Teaching,  Promifing  or  judging , 
is  a  fidion  contrary  to  Scripture.Examine  any  Texc  you  plcafe, 
and  fee  whether  ic  will  ran  well  with  fuch  an  Expofic  on,  Rom. 
4.4,5.  \i^of*t<'himthat^orktth,t.e,  Belitveth  ii  Chriji  at 
Teacher^  Judge-,  Intereejfor^icc,  is  thi  reiva  d  not  reckfiied  of 
gr4ee  but  of  Debt.  'But  to  him  that  workjtth  not^  that  is,  belie- 
vethnoton  "hrifl  as  King  and  Teacher ^6cc.  but  B  iieveth  en 
him  that  jufiifieth  the  ungodly  (an  ad  of  his  Kingly  office )  &c. 

Doth  this  run  well  ?  I  will  not  trouble  you  wi:h  fo  unfa- 

roury  a  Paraphrafe  upon  the  like  Scriptures  :  you  may  try  ac 
pleafure  on  Rom.^M  4.  and  6W  3.  Eph.z.  Phil.  j.  or  any  fudh 
Text. 

Argument  10.  If  the  Dodtine  of  the  Opponents  (  holding 
the  Affirmative)  were  crue,cbcn  no  man  can  tell  whether  he  be 
a  condemned  LegaliftjOr  not:  yea  more,  if  it  be  noc  faith  in 
Chrift  as  fuch  (containing  the  whole  EfTcnce^  by  which  we  arc 
juftified.as  oppofed  to  works,  or  which  is  none  of  thecKcln- 
ded  works ;  then  no  man  can  cell  but  he  is  a  condemned  Lc- 
galift.  But  the  Confetjuent  is  h\^e ;  therefore  fo  is  the  e^»f*- 
cedent. 

The  Reafon  of  the  Confequencc  is,  becaufe  no  man  k  able 
to  tell  you  which  is  the  fole  juftifying  Act,  or  which  are  the 
only  actf ,  if  ic  be  not  fatth  Eflentially  that  is  it  j  for  among  ail 
the  aces  before  mentioned  ,  if  a  man  miftake  and  chink  one 

other 


c+ 


17 


other  C  E.  g.  faith  in  Cbrifts  Rcfurredion ,  in  Chrift  as  King> 
Judge,  Teacher,  &c.)    is  it  by  which  he  rr^H  be  iulHHcd,thcn 
he  falls  upon  Juftification  by  Works,  and  fo  falls  ftiort  of 
Grace  ;  for  if  it  be  of  Works,  then  it  is  no  more  of  Grace  : 
elfc  Works  were  no  Works.     And  fo  no  man  can  tell  but  be 
deftroyeth  Gracc,and  expccteth  Juftification  by  works :  much 
iefscan  weak  Chriftians  tell.    I  never  yet  f^wor  heard  from 
any  Divine  a  juft  Nomination  (  with  proof)  of  the  one  Ju- 
Itifying  act ,  or  a  juft  Enumeration  of  the  many  acts,   if  all 
muft  not  be  taken  in  that  are  EfTential.     Some  fay  Affiance  is 
the  only  act:  but  as  thats  confuted  by  the  moft  that  take  in 
Affentalfo  »  fo  there  are  many  and  many  acts  of  Affiance  in 
Chrift  chat  are  neceHary-.and  they  (hould  tell  us  which  of  thefe 
it  is. 

Object.  jinAdojou  thinks  that  ^e  cmt  an)  htter  ttUwhtn  we 
have  all  t/rat  Art  Bjftntinl  f  Or  doth  tvtrj  vtak.  C^rifiian  he 
itevt  all  tht  t^inty  ArticUs  thatjoH  mtntioKcd  atfirft  ? 

^nf^.  I,  We  can  better  know  what  is  Revealed  then  whats 
inrcvealcd.    The  Scripture  tells  us  what  faith  in  Chrift  is  ^  but 
not  what  one  or  two  ad)s  do  Juftifie ,  excluding  all  other  as 
Works.     Divines  have  often  defined  Faith  j  but  I  know  not 
that  any  hath  defined  any  fuch  one  act,  as  thus  exalted  above 
tb«  reft  of  the  Effence  of  Faith.     If  we  covld  not  tell  what  is 
cfTcntial  to  Faith,  we  could  not  tell  what  faith  is.  2. The  twen- 
ty Objects  of  Aflent  before  mentioned  are  not  all  Articles 
or  material  Objects;  the  fccondisthc  formal  Object.    And 
of  the  rel^,  unlefs  the  fifth  [  Belitving  thu  Chrijl  ^41  concei- 
vedhy  tht  Holy  Gloojl ^andborM  tf  a  Vt^girt  []  may  be  txceplcd 
(wbich  I  dare  not  affirm  )  I  know  not  of  one  thats  not  effen- 
tialtoChriftianity.    And  I  thmk  if  we  had  Herecicks  among 
i7f  that  denyed  Chiit  to  be  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghoft,  we 
(hould  fcarce take  them  for  Chrirtiafl*.     But  that  roan  that 
fliill  deny  or  not  believe  that  Chrift  is  God,  that  he  is  Man, 
that  he  was  no  finner,  that  he  dyed,  and  that  for  our  fins,and 
that  he  was  a  Sacrifice  or  Ranfom'  for  us ,  and  that  he  Rofe 

Hhh  3gain, 


(4-1 8) 


again.ij  Glorified,  and  will  judge  us:  that  he'hath  offered  us  ^ 
a  pardon  of  fin  ^  that  there  will  be  a  Refurrection  of  the  bo- 
dy, anihfeEverlaftingby  this  our  Redeemer,  I  cannot  fee- 
how  he  can  be  a  Chnftian.  And  for  the  number  of  Ar» 
tides,  i  left  out  much  of  the  ancient  Creed  i:  felf,  (che  Belief 
in  God  the  Father,  Creator,  ^^.  in  the  HolyGhoft  :  the  Ar- 
ticle of  the Cathoiick Church  ,  the  Communion  of  Saints^ 
of  Chrifts  burial  ,  Defcenc  into-  Hell ,  and  more.  )  And 
vet  do  you  thin'<  this  coo  b'g  to  be  eftendal  to  Chriftian 
Faich  ?  1  f  fo,  tcil  nor  any  Heretick  that  denycth  any  one  of 
thefc,  that  he  d^nyeth  an  Effential  Article  of  our  faith. 

But  for  the  ignorant  weak  Chriftian,  I  fay,  i.  He  know- - 
eth  all  thefc  Articles  that  I  have  named  ;  but  2.  perhaps  noC> 
with  fo  ripe  a  manner  of  apprehenfion  asis  formed  into  men- 
tal words,  or  which  he  can  exprcfs  in  words  to  others  :  I  find 
my  ielf  in  my  ftudies,  that  I  have  fomtimes  an  apprehenfion 
of  a  Truth  before  I  have  ripened  that  coneeption  for  an  ex- 
prefli:)n,  ^,  And  perhaps  they  are  not  Mechodical  and  I>i-> 
ilmct  in  their  conceptions,  and  cannot  fay  that  there  are  juft 
fo  many  Articles.  Every  fick  man  can  underftand  what  it  't% 
to  defire  and  accept  of  fuch  a  man  to  be  his  Phyfitian  ^  and- 
herein  he  firft  verily  defireth  health,  and  fecondly  ,  deiiretti 
Phyfick  as  a  means  to  Health,  and  thirdly,  defireth  the  Phy- 
fitian in  order  to  the  ufe  of  that  means,  and  fourthly ,  there- 
in doth  take  him  to  be  a  Phyfician,  and  fifthly,  to  have  com- 
petent sk  lU  and  fixchly,  to  be  in  fome  meafure  faiihful,to  be 
irufted,and  fevcnthly,  doth  place  fome  confidence  in  hiro,^r., 
all  this  and  more  is  truly  in  his  mind  ;  and  yet  perhaps  they 
are  not  ripened  and  meafured  into  fuch  diftinct  conceptions^ 
as  that  he  can  di^incMy  tell  you  all  this  in  tolerable  Language^ 
or  doih  obferve  then  as  diftinct  CorKCptions  in  bimfelf  ( anil 
whether  unointuitH  the  eye  and  the  Intellect  may  not  fee  ma* 
ny  Objects  ,  though  ahobjeSlit^  the  acts  muft  be  called  ms-> 
ny  and  dtvers,  is  a  Controverfie  among  Philofophers  ^  and 
as  I  remember  Pet.  HttrtaJ,  de  Menio^a  aflSrmeth  it. )  But 
if  you  your  felveswlll  form  ali  thefe  into  diftinct  concepei* 
oq;,  and  ask  your  Catechift  hit  jadgemene  of  them ,  its  like 


c+ 


IP) 


*  he  can  raak  yoa  perceive  at  leaft  by  a  Tta  or  Nay  \  that  he 
underftands  them  all.     The  new  formed  body  of  the  Infant 
in  the  Womb  hath  all  the  Integral  parts  of  a  man  ^  and  yet 
fo  fmallthat  you  cannot  foeafily  diicern  them  as  you  may 
<!o  the  fame  parts  when  he  is  grown  up  to  manhood.     So  the 
knowledge  of  every  particular  Effential  Article  of  faith  is 
truly  in  the  weakeft  Chriftianin  the  very  moment  of  his  con- 
verfion  ;  but  perhaps  it  may  be  but  by  a  more  crude  imper- 
fect Conception ,  that  obferveth  not  every  Article  diftinctly, 
nor  any  of"  them  very  clearly,  but  his  knowledge  is  both  too 
dim  and  too  confufed.     And  yet  I  muft  fay  that  it  is  not  on- 
ly fuch  as  fome  Papifts  call  a  Virtual  or  Implicite  Faith  ot 
^knowledge,  As  to  believe  only  the  General  Revelation  and  the 
formal  Object ;  as  that  the  Scripture  is  God*  Word,  and  God 
is  true:  or  that  whatever  the  Church  propounds  as  an  Article 
of  faith  is  true;  while  they  know  not  what  the  Church  or 
Scripture  doth  propound  :  for  this  is  not  actual  Chriftian  faith, 
tut  fuch  a  part  as  a  man  may  have  that  is  no  Chriftian.    And 
yet  fome  Papifts  would  perfwade  us  that  where  this  much  is, 
{here  is  faving  faith  ,  though  the  perfon  believe  not  fyea,  oc 
denyby  the  p'^obable  Doc:rine  of  fcducing  Doctors}  fome 
of  the  forefaid  EITential  Articles. 

Argum-  1 1 .  If  the  terras  [  f  *»//;  \n  Chyifl^rtctlving  Chrifi, 
Eefii»go»(^hriJ},  &c.  ]  are  to  be  underftood  a$  Cm/,/'o/»- 
tical  and  Ethical  terms  in  a  moral  fenfe,  then  muft  we  fuppofc 
that  they  fignifie  many  Phyfical  ad;*,  and  not  any  one  only. 

Eut  thtfe  terms  arc  to  be  thus  mora lly  underflood.  Ergo. 

The  Antecedent  is  proved  thus.  Terms  are  to  be  underflood 
according  to  the  nature  of  the  Subjcd  and  Doflrine .-  But  the 
^ubjed  and  Doctrine  of  the  Gofpel  which  ufcth  thefe  terms, 
is  Moral  Political .-  therefore  the  terras  arc  agreeably  to  be  in- 
rerpretcd.  The  fame  term  mPhyfick  Law,  Mathematicki, 
Soldiery  ,  Navigation,  Husbandry, ^r.  hath  various  fignifica* 
tions  :  but  ftillitmuftbe  intcrp  cted  according  to  the  nature 
and  ufe  of  the  doctrine.  Art  or  Science  tha  maketh  ufe  of 
it.  The  confequence  oT  the  Major  is  proved, be caufe  it  is  the 
ufe  of  Ethicksand  Politicks  thus  to  interpret  fuch  phrafes  as 
Hhh  »  containing 


(410) 

contJitning  divers  Pbyfical  Aces.  Marriage  is  one  CivU  act  \ 
but  it  is  many  Phyfical  Ads  :  itcontaincth  divers  a<fts  of  the 
nndcrftandihgcancetning  the  Eflenrials  of  the  ReUtion :  and 
divers  ads  <si  the  Will  in  confeming  thereunto-  and  the  out* 
ward  words  or  (igns  of  Confent ,  for  making  the  Contract.  So 
taking  a  m  in  to  be  my  King, my  General,  my  Tutor.Teacher, 
Paftor,  Phyfician,  Mafter,  cJrciW  iignifie  the  acts  of  the  Un- 
dcrftanding,  Will  and  expt effing  Powers,  which  the  fevcral 
parts  of  the  Objects  do  require. 

Argumtnt  \i.  If  there  be  many  Ads  htjidts  Faith  in 
Chrift  aUtndant  on  it ,  and  ftthfervient  to  it ,  which  arc 
none  of  the  works  which  Paul  excludeth,  and  oppofeth  faith 
to  J  then  the  Effential  A^sof  faith  it  felf  are  none  of  thofc 
v.'orks.  But  the  Antecedent  is  true.as  I  prove  in  forae  inftan- 
ces: 

JFor  a  man  to  repent  of  fin,  to  confcfsit ,  to  believe  tnd 
confefs  that  we  are  unworthy  of  any  Mercy ,  and  unable 
to  jufVifie  our  felves ,  or  make  fatisfadion  for  our  fias,and 
that  we  are  in  abfolute  neceflity  of  Chrift,  having  no  Rightc- 
oufnefs,  Sandification  or  Sufficiency  of  our  own ,  to  take 
God  for  our  Father  reconciled  in  Chrift ,  and  to  Love  him 
accordingly  :  to  forgive  our  Brethren  from  the  fenfe  of 
Chrilh  forgiving  os;  to  fhew  our  Faith  by  fruitfull  works 
and  words.  When  T^w/  faith,  /Jow .4.4,5.  [^  To  him  thiu 
rtorketh  the  Reward  is  not  of  Grace  ]  the  meaning  is  not  [  To 
him  that  repentethjo  him  that  denietb  himfelf  and  hii  orwn  R$£h' 
teoufntfs  t9  his  fHfiification  ,  to  him  that  confeffeth  hii  fitt,  that 
hveth  Goi  at  a  rtconciltd  Father  in  Chrijl^  &c,  1  and  when  he 
faicb,  [  To  himthAt^orkefhnot^bitt  believeth"^  the  meaning 
is not[_to him thit lovetb not  (^od,  to  him  th^t  repentethnot  s 
rhutforgiveth  not  others ^Scchitt  Mieveth. 

Objed.S*^  yet  it  may  be  [  to  him  that  thinkjth  not  to  bejufii- 
fiedbj  or  for  theft,  bnt  by  Faith.  'J  Anfwer  i.  Concomitants 
and  Subordinates  may  not  be  fet  in  oppoficionjfaith  fuppofeth 
^e  Concomitancy  anb  Subfervlcncy  of  thefe  in  and  to  Jufti'^ 

iication 


C^zi) 


fication.    2,  Believing  in  Chrifts  Ranfom,may  as  well  be  ex- 
cluded too,  if  men  think  co  be  juftified  for  fo  doing  mcritori- 
oufly.    3.  He  that  thinkelh  co  be  juftified  by  any  work  in 
that  way  which  is  oppofed  to  JaRiBcation  by  Grace  tni 
Faith,  muft  think  to  be  juftified  by  the  Merit  of  them,  or 
without  a  Saviour,  which  all  thefe  Graces  forementioned  con- 
tradict.    4.  God  faith  cxpreny,  chat  we  muft  [  Repiitt  Mn4he 
cenvtrted^  thdt  9ttr f%nS7»My  hehhmtitmt'.  *ndrtftnt  that  veg 
nmj  he  fvrgiven  ;  and  if  we  confefs  our  fins^  be  is  faithful  I  And 
jufi  to  forgivt  M4  eur  fms  :  andifi$§forgiV€,i^Jha,Uht  forgiven^ 
undthat  hy  unrkj  tt'r  arejnjiified  mid  not  byf»iih  9nl/  :  ati^that 
bj  our  words  "^tfhallhejuftifitsl ;  So  that  Pauls  works  which  he 
oppofeth  faith  to,are  neither  J-'i'^f's  rvffrkss^oi  any  of  thefe  par- 
ticulars mentioned  :  for  thefe  are  made  necefrarytcondicioni 
or  means  of  pardon,  and  of  feme  fort  of  Juftification  ,  fuch 
as  Pauls  works  could  not  contribute  to.which  were  falfly  ima- 
gined by  the  doers  to  make  the  Reward  to  be  not  of  Grace 
but  Debt. 

Objeft.  Then  ubntBHt faith ^  £;>t.4.3.  Anfwer.  But 
that  Ont  faith  hath  many  Phyfical  Ads  or  Articles.  There  is 
but  one  true  Religion,  but  it  hath  many  parts.  There  is 
but  one  Gofpel,  but  that  one  contanieth  many  particular 
Truths. 


Hhh  3  Confcct. 


C42-i) 

COnfeft.  I.  loht  ]t*fl>fied  hj  Faith,  is  to  be  juftified 
by  Fsitk  in  Chri^  as  Chrifl^  and  not  by  any  one  part 
of  that  Faith,  excluding  any  of  its  Effencial  parts. 

2.  To  be  juftified  by  Faiih  in  Chrift  as  Chrifi^  and  (o  as 
RifiBg,  Teaching;  Pardoning,  Ruling,  Judging,  as  well 
as  faiisfying,  i.r.as  the  Saviour  that  hath  undei taken  aii  this, 
is  not  in  l^anli  fenfe  to  be  juftified  by  works :  therefore  it 
is  the  true  Juflification  by  Faith. 

5.  It  is  therefore  unfound  to  make  any  one  Act  or  pare 
of  Faith  the  fidts  qna  Juflificam ,  and  the  other  Eflen- 
tial  parts  fo  be  the  fidet  <ju£  jujitpcat ,  when  no  more 
can  be  faid  of  any  but  that  it  is  fdts  ex  ^ft/t  jhfiificamur, 
and  that  may  be  iaid  of  all. 

4.  Though  Faith  be  an  Acceptance  of  Chrift  and  Life 
as  offered  in  the  Gofpcl  ,  fo  that  its  very  Nature 
or  Effence  is  morally  Receptive ,  which  may  tolerab- 
ly be  called  its  Metaphorical  Pafiive  Inftrumentality  - 
yet  are  we  not  juftified  by  it  ^fta  talta,  that  is  ^^na  fides ^znd 
fo  not  ^ttatenus  Infirumentfim  tale  Mitaphoricumy  vel 
Acceftatio,  vel  Receptio  moralis  ,  but  qua  conditio  TeftameHti 
'Vilfaeltru  praftita. 

J.  There- 


5i  Therefore  it  is  not  only  the  Acceptance  of  Rlghtc-' 
oufnefs  by  which  we  are  juftifiecl,  rmich  lefs  the  AflSince  in 
Chrift  as  dymg  only ;  but  the  belief  in  Chrift  as  the  Pur- 
chafer  of  Saivacion,andas  the  Sanctitier,Gui(lc  and  Teach- 
er of  our  fouls  in  order  thereunto,  harh  as  tcue  anlntereft 
in  our  JuftiBcacion  as  the  believing  in  him  for  Pardon.  And 
fofar  as  any  other  holy  act  doth  modific  and  fubferve  faith, 
and  it  part  of  the  Condition  of  JaftiBcation  with  il,fo  far  by 
it  aifo  we  are  juftified. 


FINIS 


ry      tL> 


\ 


m 


I 


•  .      ,-^' 


1 


^>%  ^ 


/ 


'\ 


•"mti^m^p^^!^. 


,4 


!i